"It is not unreasonable to assume that this enormous energy was the creator God"

... yes it is.

>> ^quantumushroom:
It is not unreasonable to assume one-half of Congress has only contempt for the US military and will do anything to make it look awful, if only to please their warped constituents.


that's right, if that military woman wasn't wearing her uniform like that she wouldn't have been raped. she was asking for it, that little slut. it's their fault for having a vagina that so many reported rape, as is the fault of the countless others that *didn't* report it.

warped, indeed.

It is not unreasonable to assume one-half of Congress has only contempt for the US military and will do anything to make it look awful, if only to please their warped constituents.

Military personnel are more disciplined than the civilian population. They are taught history and tradition (or at least taught these things matter) and their morals and values tend to be higher than those of civilians if only because the rigors of the job test their character daily.

There are bad seeds in every organization; hearings like these typically end up being politically-motivated blanket condemnations of the Service. Rep. Harman's calling rape in the military an "epidemic" proves this point.

>> ^LittleRed:
>> ^dag:
I like women and I don't want VideoSift to be a lopsided gender mutant sausage fest.
Any ideas on how to accomplish this?

Honestly, I've got nothing. It already is a sausage fest. I am more than willing to give you a list of problems I have with the site, though.
1) The way of judging whether or not a video stays is if you, a MAN, get an erection after watching. When was the last time a woman's perspective was taken into consideration? Never. Chances are women either feel objectified or get irritated for whatever reason watching a video like the one that prompted this post. I know I did. But because someone with a vagina posted it and the rest of the boys like it, it won't be removed. The thumbnail blares her breasts across the front page (or did for several hours yesterday), forcing me to not visit the front page at all either at work or at home, because I don't want my boss or my parents walking over and seeing that, and yet no one has felt the need to change it. If I could, I would.


Ok, i have to chime in here, as i'm part of the VS story of "Dag wood test". VS has many stories, and i played only i minor role in this one as it's a community. But anyway...

The story starts here:

>> ^dag:
Definitely not porn - it passes the wood test with me. No wood is all good.
But seriously, is he trying to say that they grew their pubic hair to those lengths? Some looked to be a bout 4 feet. Surely they were extensions?


I was amused by the idea, and comment. Dag hapens to be male, and is also a rather significant admin of the site. It being his (and luckys etc). .'. if a discusion is being had about somethings acceptability, an admin stepping in judge like to both give guidance and acknowledge a need for a descision is not unreasonable. Funadmentaly, the buck does stop somewhere and as MINK ocasionaly once pointed out, this isnt a democracy.

I found the comment amusing. When a it later, another vid was posted, i quized Dag as to it's passing his wood test (which i belive it did) in a toung in cheek fashion. The phrase stuck, grew a bit further, and has been refered to a few times in a few discussions. Like the kungfu porn one, that raged, and it got discarded in the end. That was an interesting discusion.

As for "When was the last time a woman's perspective was taken into consideration? Never." seriously, that "never" is utter rubish. Many females have given their views and been lsitened too. Not just persephones, but many, and persephones always stood as an indivual, as she and dag did not always agree (i belive their responses to the kung fu vid may have varied, but i dont recall specifics).

Anyway, that Never is reactionary, and has no basis in fact. a little effort would show that. Men dont always agree with other men, just as women dont always agree with other women. we are all people, individuals, and are views are as like and unlike as leaves on the wind. The burlesque thread had strong female comments on both sides of the issiue.

If you truly belive that "never" coment, and think im talking crap, I'll hunt out that other thread.

rychan:

Given that we each have a very slow, massively parallel, biological computer that easily passes our test for intelligence it is not unreasonable to argue that speed is not necessarily at issue.

We're not yet at human performance for most tasks but the gap is quantifiably closing. What are your credentials to dismiss the thousands of top notch computer vision publications in the past decade which clearly demonstrate our progress?

I've got a little 20mhz chip on my desk I use for embedded systems, it is turing complete. Any solution you can come up for an AI problem you can run (slowly) on my chip, but if you have no such solution, the 80 core monster won't help you. Or perhaps no usable solutions exist for a turing machine at all, and we need something different which would require basically starting from scratch, that is my point.

I wasn't saying that this processor is anything revolutionary either, I'm just hoping it keeps Moore's law going. That + lots of data + lots of clever engineering will solve computer vision, which is an AI hard problem.

Parallelism will not overcome the basic problems of reaching physical minimum gate size, and you still have to get data into the thing, which becomes much more top heavy when edge cores have to hand all the code and date to the internal cores. You will of course get more GigaFlOPS, (advertised on the box in big font) but you won't be able to use anywhere near all of them. This is a 80*n progression vs Moore's n^2, if this is the new strategy, Moore's law drops away pretty fast.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'zombie, all we want is to eat your brains, not your eyes, were not unreasonable' to 'jonathan coulton, zombies, all we want is to eat your brains, not your eyes' - edited by calvados

No, changing tags is not unreasonable, because in most cases the need to do so is just basic maintenance, i.e. some sifters are lazy and don't tag at all (shame shame) or hardly at all... and then other times tags just have mistakes, like spelling (ehem... I do believe the word is 'changing' not 'chaging').

We were given the ability to change tags in order to help with these problems. If people are abusing this feature it is very rare, in fact I have never seen such a thing (except for banned members that is). I'm sorry your post got its tags changed, if the abuse becomes frequent and malicious then report it to the admins... otherwise, the feature is pretty important to streamlining maintenance around this place.

Title is same as original on YouTube. I'm sure there are worse scenes out there. Here's the original description accompanying the video on YouTube:


This is real acting. Not to mention courageous writing. This writer doesn't bog his actors down with false eloquence, he knows that when people love each other the way these two obviously do, our vocabulary breaks down, and we're often reduced to yelling "get out, get out" repeatedly. And none of us likes to be touched when we're in such a state. "Don't touch me, don't touch me" grows in power with each successive utterance, until it reaches maximum density, becoming a black hole of primal emotions.

Note the symbolism. The boyfriend is wearing a red shirt, taunting his woman, who has been reduced to a raging bull, using her horns (the left horn is "get out" and the other horn is "don't touch me") to impale him into a figurative sort of death, his leaving the apartment representing his departure from her world into the afterlife. This is sensational writing.

And right before this scene, we see Emmanuelle standing before the world's 4th largest Jesus statue, not really praying so much as just rambling to herself in her perfect English voice. Did the spirit of Jesus help her? Was she infused with his Jewish wisdom? Think about it, what were Jesus' last word? Considering that he was crucified, it's not unreasonable to imagine that his last words might have been "don't touch me, don't touch me," the exact words Emmanuelle says. With a lesser talent, you just dismiss such connections, but with a director such as this, anything is possible.

Studies have shown that the colors yellow and red make people eat more. That's why every fast food company uses these colors in their logos, signs, and interiors. This director manipulates us in the same way, adorning his two leads with these colors, making us hungry for more of these kind of scenes that make similar scenes in movies such as A Streetcar Named Desire look like an infomercial by comparison.

My only minor gripe is that I felt this scene could have been longer.

C'mon, man - surely you can look at the blueprints yourself and see that's not the case.

I'm showing you all of the evidence I have and asking for, what should be, a simple chart. I've seen that chart explaining why the WTC could NOT fall that fast(as the buildings are seen to fall in the videos). It's not unreasonable to request a chart of why it WOULD fall that fast.

There - I told you what it would take to sway my beliefs. What would it take for your beliefs to be swayed?