I appreciate your response to my question earlier, @bobknight33.

I don't mean to try to drag you back into the thread here if you're trying to disengage -- I dunno what you mean by #walkaway. Anyway, this doesn't require a response.

I largely agree with you on the specific subtopic of both parties being pretty dirty and frequently engaging in "government theater" just to draw attention to trivialities while promoting their own self interests. I also largely agree with Trump being a "true outsider" in the sense that he holds no particular allegiance to party machinations, etc.

However, even though I was willing to give him a chance after the election, at this point I have zero trust in Trump's intentions. Trumps friends -- the "best people" -- have this interesting trend of becoming his detractors and enemies. Trump wants us to accept the word of people that vouch for him, but days, weeks, or months later they fall out of favor and suddenly he says that they are scum and we shouldn't listen to a word they say.

That's a "cry wolf" or "fool me once" sort of problem. Sessions, the guy you mentioned as protecting Trump from the "witch hunt", has been pretty relentlessly bashed by Trump for the weighty offense of allowing investigators to investigate. Giuliani spouts nonsense, doublespeak and contradictions. Huckabee-Sanders refuses to answer very basic questions from the press (which is her job) not because they misquote her or take things out of context (which would be legitimate gripes) but because she's been bitten in the ass a few too many times by people pointing out blatant contradictions in Trump's statements. And that's just the current people.
There's a large list of short-term Trump appointments that end up out of favor.

What all that stuff says to me is ... "something is rotten in the state of Denmark". Is it possible that there's a vast conspiracy against him in the media, justice department, etc.? Um, well, maybe -- but Occam's Razor tells me that other possibilities are rather more likely. Like, for example, that Trump being a "true outsider" doesn't preclude him from holding the same self-serving motivations that are unfortunately common in slimy career politicians. That he acts shady and dirty because he is shady and dirty.

I dunno. It just seems like it takes a lot of work to keep up with Trump's revolving door of steadfast allies that become traitorous enemies.

This looks like it has a lot of potential to be a razor thin plot covered over by shiny special effects.

MK Ultra (the program) was real, but it never actually worked.

Besides, if I subliminally messaged “obey helium” to you, even if the subliminal message worked, you’d need to know that “helium” is my code name for “send ChaosEngine money” to have any effect.

The government is clearly not innocent, but neither are they some super competent evil geniuses either.

It’s great that you want to question things, but you should always apply Occams Razor and always look for evidence to back up any outlandish claims.

This is, in fact, rather common. If you take a look at fencing manuals (Talhofer and the like). Please remember that the blade was not razor-sharp because it was supposed to work against mail and plate.

I still use one of those double edged razors, works soooooo much better than the new ones.

EDIT: If you are wondering, the new razor containers have a slot in the back to slide the used ones in. They also last for a lot longer than one shave, usually about 2 weeks if I shave every day. You can tell when they start slightly tugging at the hairs prior to cutting them. They are a lot cheaper than normal disposable razors as well.

I'm normally a big fan of Occam's Razor, but this is one of those questions that demonstrate why it's a rule-of-thumb, rather than a law. As the study that @transmorpher linked to shows, there appears to be a serious degree of homeostasis in the human metabolism. In short, the simple explanations just don't explain the observations.

If refugees begin to act in a hostile manner because their plight is minimized and ignored while they are demonized and dehumanized but others that actually did the terroristic and anti American things they are suspected of are not given that treatment, that's human nature. Racist/xenophobic actions often cause anger.
Edit: keep in mind, most that are radicalized are teenagers and early 20's, so aren't the most rational or non violent by nature of their age, regardless of their culture.

It's not like that at all, imo. It's like a political/war refugee saying 'keep your international legal obligations or we'll dislike you more'. How much more do you think some need to dislike us before they act on that hatred? I would say we've created plenty of victims that are on that razors edge and only need a nudge to make their reasonable hatred become action....and giving them nothing to lose by acting, not a good idea.

I'm basically done with defending WikiLeaks as well, after the shit they pulled with the leaks of Turkish data. Completely irresponsible, that one.

However, WikiLeaks doesn't need credibility -- the data does. And the data they published vis-á-vis Clinton/Podesta/DNC is, as of now, solid. There was one fake document, but that was shown to have been injected by someone other than WL.

"Strong bias" -- oh, I do have a strong bias. Plural, as in biases, actually. For instance, I'm disinclined to take anything the US intelligence agencies say at face value, given how they manufactured more than one casus belli. I don't put much weight into (un-)official statements in general, but especially since all the misinformation they spread about issues like the coup in Honduras or the actions of Nazi militias in Ukraine.

In this particular case, however, my argument is much simpler: Occam's razor seems much more likely than malicious intent. Propaganda outlets on both sides are run by people. Maybe the propaganda outlet Sputnik intentionally twisted the content of email, or maybe they just fucked up, like people are wont to do. Maybe someone intentionally fed Trump this bad info, maybe his people are just as incompetent as he is.

There are too many parts in this that include people who have more than once proven themselves to be utterly incompetent, or in complete ignorance of even the concept of truth. I don't think Trump gives a shit about truth or facts, he strikes me as the typical blowhard who spouts whatever shit comes to mind, and spins stories on the fly like a 4-year-old when caught red-handing.

No need for a conspiracy there, with all this incompetence, naiveté and plain disregard for facts.

So when they keep on pushing the Russian angle in this, it just seems like a desperate attempt to conjure up the old unifying enemy. Why worry about Russian propaganda when there's plenty on FOX and MSNBC/CNN? Why worry about Russian hackers when you accept the unbelievably insecure method of eletronic votes, partly without paper trails, and completely controlled by private companies?

It's just very strange to an outsider like me to see them focus on perceived external influences when the internals are a complete clusterfuck. And this presidential election is the biggest clusterfuck I've seen in 30 years, which doesn't mean much, admittedly.

That said, we can't just be looking at it from the outside with binoculars, not when people are back to full-blown Cold War rhetoric. When the ruling class in the US and/or the ruling class in Russia start their pissing contests and other forms of grandstanding, it's usually brown people who pay the price, like they have been in Syria for the last couple of years. And Libya. And Yemen. And Somalia. And Afghanistan, And Iraq. And Pakistan.

Personally, all the rhetoric about "standing up to Russian aggression" and similar nonsense makes me keenly aware that the bridge just outside my hometown was constructed with a shaft to place explosives in, to slow down advancing Soviet troops... so yes, I would very much like to bitch-slap all these warmongerers on both sides, but particularly the ones in the US since they are currently the ones racking up the highest death toll.

Edit: I should have made it clearer. Yes, WL is absolutely biased against Clinton and they do seem to act in support of Trump. Assange in particular. Which bums me out to no end, since I actually met the guy in person when they presented WL at the 26C3.

With the amount of money being spent by really smart people I'm sure something about it is valid. It's just, right now, they're all yammering about facts not in evidence. Also, as their quantum computers are actually slower and less powerful than contemporary computers, occam's razor would suggest it's a elaborate black box scam with a couple Raspberry Pies burbling away inside. Until they start using them to increase my FPS, I'm not buying into the technobabble.

Wow! That comment is over 8 years old. I barely remember posting it, so it's nice to be able to appreciate my own razor wit with a fresh perspective. ;-p Thanks, Sifty!

You might be right about the coup being a deception, but I also think that that's the opposite of Occam's razor. Saying that Erdogan ordered / incited / allowed the coup in order to facilitate greater dictatorial authority for himself is a more complex explanation than saying it's a poorly executed military coup. The world has seen failed coups before, so it's not an impossibility.

The least complex explanation would be that it was a poorly executed, earnest coup attempt. The second least complex explanation would be that it was a poorly executed coup attempt that Erdogan allowed to happen because he was confident that it would play into his hands. The third least complex explanation is that it was a poorly executed coup attempt funded by the CIA to undermine a potential Putin ally? http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21702337-turkish-media-and-even-government-officials-accuse-america-being-plot-after

"we dont know whos behind the plot" - well then youre not really explaining it, are you?

Fishy plot. Cui bono? Occams razor says Erdogan organized it.

@ahimsa

and now we move to stage two of the predictable vegan argument:

distinctions.


oh fuck me with a razor bladed dildo this is some tiring and facile shit.

look man,you are seriously missing my main point:
pretentious twattery and a morally and philosophically inconsistent stance.

so you can keep quoting anybody and everybody because it is apparent you really do not understand what you are quoting,and it is not adding anything to our discussion...at all.

maybe..
possibly..
just something to consider...
you approach expressing the values and benefits of being a vegan sans the self-righteousness,the pretension and condescension?

that maybe because YOU became a vegan for moral and ethical reasons,others may have come to it from other means and for other reasons,and allow those who are NOT vegan to come to their own conclusions and make their own choices?

and maybe not be so judgey mcjudgerface if they choose differently than you?

look man,we all do something that gives us the "feel goods".

some recycle obsessively,even though there is little evidence that actually makes a difference.

others drive a hybrid and feel that is their contribution,even though it is actually worse.

some will only buy organic and/or shop locally.(thats me btw)
and even though this brings some coin to the local farmers,taken on a whole it is barely a blip against the monster that is wal mart.

i have friends who do beach clean up every year,even though it gets destroyed within a month.

so we all try to do something that fits our perceptions of the world and how we can make it a better place.

and yes..if we ALL got together we could make a massive change in the current dynamics,not only locally but globally.

so i get it mate..i really do.

i guess what i am suggesting at it's core is this:
stop acting like a newly converted jehovahs witness who just wants us all to hear about your new buddy jesus.

i also think i should share that my long time girlfriend is vegan.
not your judgey,self righteous,pretenscious type vegan..but a vegan.

and that girl can't cook worth a damn.
which means that cooking falls on ME.
do i still eat meat?
yep,but not that often and rarely..raaarely red meat.
and to my girls credit she never gives me shit,i may get the upturned nose but never actual verbal shit.

red curry anyone?

It's amazing to me that they think people are dumb enough to believe this is real, and are doubling down with the 'follow up' video....more so that they're right to some extent, because many have been duped into believing this.

It's clearly a shaved spot on her head.... hair doesn't rip out in razor sized straight lines, hair doesn't rip out into short bangs, and hair doesn't rip out into uniformly cut 1/2" long areas.
I'm going to guess that her entire head is cropped short....about 1/2" short except in the bald spot where it's shaved...and all that long hair is just extensions loosely taped to her head. You can see that at least the entire front is cut 1/2" short if you pause it at 12sec. and you can see at least one tract of hair with it's sticker still in the 'bald' spot.
There's a reason this was posted in 240p, it makes it much easier to hide all the obvious flaws. In fact, I would say there's a likelihood that any exciting video posted in 240p or worse has a 99% likelihood of being fake. People suck, and for some reason a lot of them get off on tricking people by lying.

D'OH!!! OK, I'm calling fake on my own post.
I would expect lots of blood from such a chunk being ripped out, so I slowed down in full screen and noticed absolutely zero blood, but that there was what looks like a square band-aid in the bald spot...then I realized it was actually a piece of fake hair on a sticker that hadn't ripped off with the rest...then I noticed the clear sharp lines of the outline made by the razor she used to shave the bald spot.
*debunked