If people don't want to plant vegetable gardens, then what about habitat for something to live in? Lawns are a wasteland for native plant, animal, fungal, and bacteria species.
Also, I don't buy the carbon sink thing. Powered lawnmowers put out a lot of CO2. Also, a lot of cut grass decays... and that releases greenhouse gasses as well.
Oh.. and 'pesticides' were mentioned, but what about herbicide and fertilizer run off?
OhX2... and lawns are reeeaaaally ugly!

>> ^Yogi:

It's an eco-disaster? I wouldn't think it could be that bad seeing as it's in a horrible wasteland of a desert. It makes sense it would harm the ocean near it though. I was more concerned as you said about the human rights aspect and the slave labor used to build it.


Wastelands are a result of an imbalance in a biosphere. They are usually a result of human interaction within an ecosystem, or occasionally large asteroids/meteors. Deserts are not wastelands, they have some of the most diverse and adaptive lifeforms on the planet.

Yes, fucking up a desert is still considered causing an Eco-disaster.

As for the slave labor... 95% of our goods in North America are from sweat shops over seas. Who are we to pass judgment on ethical practices overseas when we endorse those same practices in every consumer product we purchase?

There is a good reason I find it harder to sleep as each new night approaches.

Edit: dammit that made me bitter. It's a good video of people having fun.

>> ^EMPIRE:

Dubai is such a fucking eco-disaster (and also human rights disaster, considering the conditions and pay most construction workers have over there), but at the same time, it also like humans are shaking their angry fists at nature, shouting: "Damn you nature! We will have what we want, when and where we want to". And that's kinda cool I guess.
edit: also, I'm playing Spec Ops: The line so....


It's an eco-disaster? I wouldn't think it could be that bad seeing as it's in a horrible wasteland of a desert. It makes sense it would harm the ocean near it though. I was more concerned as you said about the human rights aspect and the slave labor used to build it.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^spoco2:

Yeah, and the whole 'promote' a status thing, with the option of paying to promote being trialled also spells the end it would seem.
People are entrenched, to be sure, but if a cleaner, competitor comes along and provides a simple migration process ('enter your login details and we'll transfer all your photos/videos over to our FlubBrook service now'), people will jump ship if Facebook keeps becoming more and more and more of an advertising platform rather than a social network.

I think any competitor would genuinely struggle simply to overcome the inertia, i.e. everyone is on facebook because everyone is on facebook. Look at Google+. Their interface was cleaner, they had some neat ideas (I still think the "circles" concept is something facebook needs to steal), but no-one posted there because they weren't going to post the same thing twice. As a sidenote, I personally didn't like using google as a social network. Google already knows waaaay too much about me.


Don't underestimate the power of 'new and improved'... No-one thought people would move away from AOL at the time. People thought Myspace was the bee's knees. It seems like the way to build up a new social network is start specialised then grow out.

Myspace did with music, then grew out.
Facebook did so with one school, then many then anyone.
Google+ didn't do that, and it doesn't seem to be catching on yet.

If there's a competitor where they do something the others don't do really well, perhaps for a particular sub section of the market. Then that group of people will favour it... then slowly others who have to interact with the sub section will keep finding themselves being pointed there... then eventually THEY want to get in on this new action... then they use the new site's ability to auto post to Facebook so their old friends don't miss anything... then the old friends start wanting to use these new fangled things the new site has... until everyone has shifted over and Facebook becomes a wasteland that only receives auto posts from other sites.



Or, you could be right and it'll be here until we blast off from the rotting ball of Earth for our new home on another planet.

Sorry for the reeeaaally long post @marinara but I was trying to be brief:

1. "Zimmerman was not part of any REGISTERED neighborhood watch group."

Zimmerman did indeed say that he was "captain" of his neighborhood watch, and I can't find any proof that he wasn't, do you know why? Because there is no documentation regarding his neighborhood watch program, because it was unregistered and existed only in the heads of two or three people. And, might I add, it was certainly not "official".

When a person forms a neighborhood watch, it might be important to take into account the community that they live in. What if the community doesn't want a neighborhood watch program? What if they do, but they feel they don't want you representing them, as some people in Zimmerman's community clearly felt?

The fact is that Zimmmerman's self-appointed title carried no legitimacy at all. If my friend Cletus and I want to call ourselves the neighborhood watch, we can. I can call myself "secretary treasurer" and he can call himself "supreme overlord". But it has no more meaning than when my friend Nick and I get together and call ourselves a "fourteenth level archer", and "Nargok, the dwarven battlemage" (respectively). Only, in the case of the neighborhood watch titles, one must consider the community they are attempting to represent. This is why most watch programs (like the one you linked to) register themselves with the National Sheriff's Association, or some other organization.

2. "Oh and I documented a procedure for neighborhood watches to arrest people and a simple google search will correct you of the idea that the watch should not carry guns."

What you documented on the "City of Oxnard, Police Department" website was that citizen watch volunteers (who are registered) are encouraged to make arrests when they have seen a crime being committed, in particular, when they see someone committing the crime of vandalism. All US citizens have the right to make a citizen's arrest, but no one has the right to arrest or detain anyone for "suspicious behavior", even if that person is walking down the street wearing a hoodie, and looking skeptically at the person following them.

As to the gun, the same Oxnard website you linked to, on the same page, advises that no one carry a weapon at all, except for a heavy-duty flashlight that might be used to defend one's self in an emergency. Unfortunately, a Google search relating to neighborhood watch organizations carrying guns is inundated with articles and polls regarding this tragic case. The fox news polls indicate that a minority of people questioned think neighborhood watch members should carry guns, but those people do not reflect the views of any actual organization (that exists outside of its member's heads) that I know of.

I'd like to refer you to the response to the NY Times from Curtis Sliwa, founder of the Guardian Angels. The Angels are one of the most prolific watch organizations in history, with chapters all over the world. They were founded in the late seventies in NYC when the areas they patrolled were considered wastelands. Despite several attempts on the founder's life, and the loss of a few of its members over the years, they still do not advise carrying guns.

3. "...why do you insist on saying martin was an unarmed child? This is absurd."

I say it for two reasons: the first is that Martin was unarmed. There are no eyewitness reports, or even statements from Zimmerman that I've heard, that indicate that Martin attempted to use his bag of Skittles or his can of iced-tea as a weapon. The second reason I say it is that according to the US legal system, Martin was still a child at the time of his death. If he were in the "Child Protective Services' program, he wouldn't have gotten out until he was eighteen, which is the age that US citizens officially become adults (unless they're insane). Some children are tried as adults in the US, but child-victims are never represented as adults.

I understand if you think it's more appropriate to refer to Martin as a teenager, or possibly an adolescent, or even a young adult. But I don't think so, and I'll tell you why: I'm thirty-one years old. I'm not much older by comparison, but when I see a seventeen-year-old kid, I rarely think to myself, "he's got everything figured out". In fact, I rarely think that about most adults. Sure, I think most kids are smarter than people give them credit for, but I don't think Martin was mature enough to know the law and develop an appropriate response to being pursued for no reason by a man armed with a gun. And the US legal system hasn't made a determination in his case yet anyway.

>> ^renatojj:

Guys, THIS IS REAL, listen to the music, it filled me with so much hope. I watched it over and over, and I felt so inspired!
Also, in the end he stands there almost breathless speaking what must be the language of angels, I couldn't understand a single word


EXACTLY. You can't argue with that feeling of truthiness that builds in your cockles at music like that. I would've used "Teenage Wasteland" personally, but the idea is the same.

Before he showed up with nanos in his hands and such, I though the city was an imagining of the wastelands from the Shannara series of books.

@chilaxe

Wtf are you talking about man.

How is "Public transit's very developed here. It looks like this." followed by a picture of Mad Max's post-apocalyptic wasteland in any way a "reasonable hypothesis" or intellectual argument for the negative consequences of the talking points blanket term: "socialism"?

Secondly, if you're allowed to show extreme prejudice toward your assumed stereotypes of all blacks and hispanics.. why can't I?

By your very own logic, it would be inconceivable to assume you're a successful non-white living in the lap of luxury and high society in the middle of Silicon Valley.

Seeing as you constantly stereotype all non-white [excluding asians] as lazy moochers feeding off the tit of NObama's Socialist Welfare State.

Fer shit sake, you even used the term "societal decay". Which I've already revealed as another talking point for bigots who subscribe to the ideology of forums like Parapundit.com i.e. YOU.

Not that it would matter if you're part of a non-white ethnic group. Every comment you make on the sift about society and races is utterly hateful and presumptuous about scenarios [being a low income single black mother living in Oakland] you have NO CLUE about.

At the very least you're hypocritical and ignorant by choice.

Either way, you're a troll.

Am I the only one who immediately feels like I'm back in the Capital Wastelands when hearing this kind of music?

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^shuac:
Could we please have a generation of tweens that are not stupid, just one, is that to too much to ask for.
Well, I expect tweens to be kinda stupid but I've been kidding myself about the average Videosifter's ability to write correctly, which is, I believe, symptomatic of intelligence. Oh well.

I was curious to see if you ever made a mistake while writing English.
Took 30 seconds to find this gem.
>> ^shuac:
I'd just like to say that I have no opinion about this video. I am apathetic like you read about.



LOL! That's what I get for trying to use an idiom, a very new idiom, granted, but an idiom nonetheless. Some idioms only work when you say them aloud and this is one of them.

I'm going to come off as a bit nutty typing this all out but nutty is a label I'm ok with.

When people say "like you read about" they're being emphatic and pointed. For instance, I might say, "I'm fuckin' cold like you read about." People who've taken the time to write books and articles about tundra wasteland and life above the arctic circle typically don't spend that time on the page writing about how warm it is. When someone takes the time to read such a book or article, they walk away knowing something about chilly weather. It typically only works with extreme states: extreme cold, extreme heat, or in my case extreme apathy. So what I'm really saying with "like you read about" is an attempt to express solidarity with the writer of such books/articles.

Capice? I'm not surprised you may not have heard about it but all these sayings had to come from somewhere, no?

Without context, I admit, it reads kind of wrong. Oh well. I forgive you, Boise.

Hive, I would do the same, but this is far from what happened in this particular case.>> ^Hive13:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Hive13:
This happened over four years ago. Joe Horn was cleared by a grand jury in 2008. Both men were shot on Joe Horn's property and by Texas law he is within his state rights to defend his property.
Now, I am not saying that what he did was right or justified in any way, but, if two men ran onto my property after I personally witnessed them robbing my neighbor, I'd be reaching for a gun. I wouldn't be looking for a fight like this guy was, but I'd sure a shit defend my property.

No ones attacking property...they're taking it. If they had guns and were firing on your property then I'd understand. However taking your bullshit TV and knick knacks just doesn't mean a fucking thing which it comes to peoples lives period.
Now if you were say in a position where all you had was some food to live and they were stealing your food then I'd say you'd have the right to defend your life with deadly force. But this scenario would most likely have to play out in Africa or some post apocalyptic wasteland that people seem to wish would come around so they could shoot people on a whim.

So, I should just let convicted felon illegal immigrants with a vast criminal history just walk into my house and take whatever they want, in the presence of my wife and four children? What fucking planet do you live on? There are many people out there that would kill you and anyone in your house for $50.
The right to defend your property is an American right from the very beginning of this country. It isn't about property in the material sense....who cares about that? It is property in the sense that my wife and kids needs to feel safe and secure in their own home in their own beds.
In this case, I would have watched them from inside my home, called 911 and waited. If they headed toward my house, you had better believe that there would be one of my several guns in my hand ready to stop them from entering my house. If they did actually enter, they would get one warning and then they would get shot. Period.
If you don't live in America, I don't expect you to understand, but we have a lot of bad people here with bigger guns and no issue at all with murdering an entire family, kids and all, for an Xbox.

>> ^Hive13:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Hive13:
This happened over four years ago. Joe Horn was cleared by a grand jury in 2008. Both men were shot on Joe Horn's property and by Texas law he is within his state rights to defend his property.
Now, I am not saying that what he did was right or justified in any way, but, if two men ran onto my property after I personally witnessed them robbing my neighbor, I'd be reaching for a gun. I wouldn't be looking for a fight like this guy was, but I'd sure a shit defend my property.

No ones attacking property...they're taking it. If they had guns and were firing on your property then I'd understand. However taking your bullshit TV and knick knacks just doesn't mean a fucking thing which it comes to peoples lives period.
Now if you were say in a position where all you had was some food to live and they were stealing your food then I'd say you'd have the right to defend your life with deadly force. But this scenario would most likely have to play out in Africa or some post apocalyptic wasteland that people seem to wish would come around so they could shoot people on a whim.

So, I should just let convicted felon illegal immigrants with a vast criminal history just walk into my house and take whatever they want, in the presence of my wife and four children? What fucking planet do you live on? There are many people out there that would kill you and anyone in your house for $50.
The right to defend your property is an American right from the very beginning of this country. It isn't about property in the material sense....who cares about that? It is property in the sense that my wife and kids needs to feel safe and secure in their own home in their own beds.
In this case, I would have watched them from inside my home, called 911 and waited. If they headed toward my house, you had better believe that there would be one of my several guns in my hand ready to stop them from entering my house. If they did actually enter, they would get one warning and then they would get shot. Period.
If you don't live in America, I don't expect you to understand, but we have a lot of bad people here with bigger guns and no issue at all with murdering an entire family, kids and all, for an Xbox.


WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!? It wasn't his home...his neighbors weren't fucking there. They were absolutely NO THREAT. Are you just making shit up to get mad about or something?

Also yes I live in America, I've lived in some of the worst areas of Southern California. Never had a problem because this epidemic of bad people coming into your home and murdering you doesn't exist.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Hive13:
This happened over four years ago. Joe Horn was cleared by a grand jury in 2008. Both men were shot on Joe Horn's property and by Texas law he is within his state rights to defend his property.
Now, I am not saying that what he did was right or justified in any way, but, if two men ran onto my property after I personally witnessed them robbing my neighbor, I'd be reaching for a gun. I wouldn't be looking for a fight like this guy was, but I'd sure a shit defend my property.

No ones attacking property...they're taking it. If they had guns and were firing on your property then I'd understand. However taking your bullshit TV and knick knacks just doesn't mean a fucking thing which it comes to peoples lives period.
Now if you were say in a position where all you had was some food to live and they were stealing your food then I'd say you'd have the right to defend your life with deadly force. But this scenario would most likely have to play out in Africa or some post apocalyptic wasteland that people seem to wish would come around so they could shoot people on a whim.


So, I should just let convicted felon illegal immigrants with a vast criminal history just walk into my house and take whatever they want, in the presence of my wife and four children? What fucking planet do you live on? There are many people out there that would kill you and anyone in your house for $50.

The right to defend your property is an American right from the very beginning of this country. It isn't about property in the material sense....who cares about that? It is property in the sense that my wife and kids needs to feel safe and secure in their own home in their own beds.

In this case, I would have watched them from inside my home, called 911 and waited. If they headed toward my house, you had better believe that there would be one of my several guns in my hand ready to stop them from entering my house. If they did actually enter, they would get one warning and then they would get shot. Period.

If you don't live in America, I don't expect you to understand, but we have a lot of bad people here with bigger guns and no issue at all with murdering an entire family, kids and all, for an Xbox.

>> ^Hive13:

This happened over four years ago. Joe Horn was cleared by a grand jury in 2008. Both men were shot on Joe Horn's property and by Texas law he is within his state rights to defend his property.
Now, I am not saying that what he did was right or justified in any way, but, if two men ran onto my property after I personally witnessed them robbing my neighbor, I'd be reaching for a gun. I wouldn't be looking for a fight like this guy was, but I'd sure a shit defend my property.


No ones attacking property...they're taking it. If they had guns and were firing on your property then I'd understand. However taking your bullshit TV and knick knacks just doesn't mean a fucking thing which it comes to peoples lives period.

Now if you were say in a position where all you had was some food to live and they were stealing your food then I'd say you'd have the right to defend your life with deadly force. But this scenario would most likely have to play out in Africa or some post apocalyptic wasteland that people seem to wish would come around so they could shoot people on a whim.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^zombieater:
>> ^RadHazG:
It never fails to amaze me that self-righteous Prius drivers (as opposed to normal ones) never seem to realize it costs the environment MORE just to build their stupid car than it does to build and run the average "gas guzzler". But then the environmental side has its share of idiotic nutters who don't care about reality or facts, just like the climate change deniers have as well.

>> ^Yogi:
I used to drive a Prius. Depending on how old the Diesel truck is it might be better for the environment than a new prius. A new car takes a lot to put into it, there was a report done on the Prius in particular, it gets its batterys from a plant in Canada I believe and around that plant it's become a complete wasteland. Also it's components are shipped from other parts of the globe on boats which burn TONS of fuel as well.
You want something good for the environment, buy a used car from someplace where another person won't be buying a new car to replace it. Keep your car on the road and take care of it, that's the best you can do.

Well it seems that there are a few reporters who have done their research and who would disagree with those statements. This article focuses more on the battery farce and addresses Yogi's statement about the "wasteland" in Canada (also a peer reviewed article does the same).

Both those articles are about Hummer vs. Prius, not what I was talking about at all.


The first article talks about an old used car vs. a Prius. Wasn't that your point, that a used car is more environmentally friendly?