search results matching tag: smart kid

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (6)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (29)   

A two-year-old resolves a moral dilemma

newtboy jokingly says...

If people are trying to commit suicide in a way that doesn't hurt others, let them, even help, lest they try some other way that will harm others. This isn't murder, it's indifference. Smart kid.

nock (Member Profile)

Daily Show: Australian Gun Control = Zero Mass Shootings

scheherazade says...

There already are reasonable restrictions.

(I can't really ask to be exempt from laws that don't even exist. But I can ask for those new laws to not be written.)

Consider this.
Maybe /you/ are not special.
Maybe /you/ are not in this world to do with other people's lives how /you/ see fit.
Maybe /you/ should take the very advice you would give to violent offenders, and just leave people in peace.


Yes, this country has clusterfuckish problems.
But guns are not the cause.

We have a very high percentage of uneducated people. For example, my high school, in one of the nicest areas of the entire country, with the super easy U.S. curriculum, with the super relaxed and curved U.S. grading policy, 30% of kids that entered never graduated. And that's one of the better examples in the country.

The problem isn't even the education system. It's cultural. Kids show up to socialize, and smart kids get made fun of. Often they have no parental pressure to perform either. No amount of money can fix that kind of schooling, because it's not a schooling problem.

They don't just miss out on an education that helps them obtain gainful employment. The concepts of empathy and solidarity are essentially omitted.

There is a proverbial horde out there, many under strong financial pressures. Having the same consumer impulses that most people here have, they resort to augmenting their incomes with questionable activities.

The median *individual* income in the U.S. is around 26k / year. Half the population makes less than that... The cheapest unassisted rent in my area is ~800/month. Go to new york, and you could be paying 1600/month each with 3 other people for a rat hole. After water, electricity, food, fuel, you'd be wiped out. Any emergency (broken down car, medical expenses, whatever), and you are in the hole.

The nice areas you see on TV are a minority. Most of the country is a po-dunk shit hole, full of people that get desperate the moment things go bad. Which leads to restricted activities, and that tends to lead to violent encounters.

We have a very high percentage of arrested/jailed people.
When you're arrested, even if not convicted, you're not acceptable by a large proportion of jobs. The police even call your employer right away to let them know you've been arrested. You are essentially marked.

Like I said, 1 in 18 men are in the system. That's a LOT of people. Other than those on parole, they aren't working. Those that are working aren't making much money (on account of the undereducation and arrest record), and will likely be back in the system.

BTW, more than half of them are in jail for an activity that never even involved another person.
Most are there for harmless stuff.

Once these people do get out of jail, if they weren't already under financial pressure, they likely now are, and will stand a good chance at reinforcing the problem population.

(eg. Person with their life more or less in order goes to jail for having a bag of drugs, then they get out, can't get a job, and they need to resort to sketchy crap to make ends meet. Maybe get into violence, but often just return to jail.)

But, it's not by accident. Our jails are for-profit, with people in government making money from the jailing industry. Either by campaign contributions, lobbying, or by having financial stake in the companies.

The most self-serving thing the government can do, is keep the problem going, and tell people that they should rely on the government to fix it by getting tough. Then the govies make money on the jailing side, and they reinforce their public mandate.

The jailing companies themselves put inmates to work making cheap goods (ever bought a t-shirt that was made in the U.S.? It was probably inmate labor.), and then 'charge the inmates rent', effectively paying them a penny a day. Modern slavery.

All along the way, the taxpayers are paying the bills, and it's just a giant trough to feed from.

I hope you can imagine why I'm averse to making more ways to jail people that aren't being a problem.

It's also why I'm inclined to make drugs legal (pretty much try Portugal's approach). So as to bring that trade into the light, and end the gangster turf wars (which are a high proportion of the gun violence).

A lot of this could be fixed long-term by social engineering, using media to elevate the prestige of education and productivity. But we know that that is not going to happen when there is no money to be made on it.

-scheherazade

ChaosEngine said:

Leaving aside the idiocy of requesting that you get special exemption from a law....

What most people are talking about actually wouldn't affect you. This is what is so perplexing about US gun politics. Absolutely no-one is suggesting that you can't have guns. The only things that are being suggested are some reasonable restrictions on what type of guns you can own, and how you purchase them.

Ahh fuck it, I'm bored with this. Keep thinking that you're not an unpaid mouthpiece for the gun industry. Continue murdering each other and especially kids with gleeful abandon.

I'm just glad I don't live in your clusterfuck of a country.

Lockheed F-35 vs F-18 Super Hornet

newtboy jokingly says...

The smart kid took the $10, bought one F-18 Super Hornet, and took his family to dinner (on the $1 menu) with the rest. He wasn't there arguing the merits of one (non-functional toy) vs the other (more toys than he can play with), he was busy feeding his family.
I'm often upset that our government doesn't see the third options. Apparently it is too complicated for some.

Grumpy Kid on First Day of School

Why Cops don't like Baggy Clothes

chilaxe says...

>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^chilaxe:
@VoodooV
A clever person might be able to hide a weapon inside a uniform, but uniforms still serve their purpose if it's more difficult to do so and if data shows it occurs less frequently.
(But all smart kids should do the world a favor and drop out, take their high school equivalency, and go straight to community college / online classes.)

I am agreeing with you. I'm just ripping on the video because they're pretending that uniforms are this magic shield against firearms and basically trying to scare dumb white people.


As long as uniforms work (reduce the use of weapons), I don't see any reason to downplay the value of the video and uniforms. They're not claiming a 100% success rate.

Poor people deserve freedom from violence as much as middle & upper class people, who don't care as much because they don't send their kids to schools where this is a problem.

Why Cops don't like Baggy Clothes

VoodooV says...

>> ^chilaxe:

@VoodooV
A clever person might be able to hide a weapon inside a uniform, but uniforms still serve their purpose if it's more difficult to do so and if data shows it occurs less frequently.
(But all smart kids should do the world a favor and drop out, take their high school equivalency, and go straight to community college / online classes.)


I am agreeing with you. I'm just ripping on the video because they're pretending that uniforms are this magic shield against firearms and basically trying to scare dumb white people.

Why Cops don't like Baggy Clothes

chilaxe says...

@VoodooV
A clever person might be able to hide a weapon inside a uniform, but uniforms still serve their purpose if it's more difficult to do so and if data shows it occurs less frequently.

(But all smart kids should do the world a favor and drop out, take their high school equivalency, and go straight to community college / online classes.)

Presentation Fight - IPad vs Surface

Sarzy says...

>> ^shuac:

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.
Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.
Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.
The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.
Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.
You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"
They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?
To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.



Cool story bro.

No, seriously though, you do raise some interesting arguments. The only point I was trying to make is that it seems a bit reductionist to dismiss the Surface as merely an iPad clone, when it seems like Microsoft is legitimately trying to do some interesting things with it and Windows 8, rather than just jumping on the iPad bandwagon.

Presentation Fight - IPad vs Surface

shuac says...

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.

* Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
* Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
* Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
* MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
* Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.

Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.

The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.

Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.

You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"

They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?

To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.

Take that, Bloomberg -- Noah has his first sip of root beer

Kickass 15 Yr. Old Kid Uses Nanotubes To detect Cancer

Your Stupid Fat Kids Suck* - A Message From Their Teachers

4 year old Pranks her dad with a Hidden Camera Scare

Watch Rick Perry's Campaign End Before Your Eyes

Crosswords says...

>> ^csnel3:

Man O Man! I love how Ron Paul senses Perry is drowning and throws him a couple bricks.


I laughed my ass off when Perry turned to Ron Paul for help. Its the dumb kid asking the smart kid next to him in class for the answer to question 3.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon