https://abc7.com/shoplifting-video-san-francisco-walgreens-theft/10791421/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/16/us/san-francisco-shoplifting-walgreens/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/us/san-francisco-shoplifting-epidemic.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_California_Proposition_47

Since the passage, retail stores have reported a spike of 50 percent in shoplifting. In many cities, like San Francisco, it is almost ignored by the police because it is a waste of time to try to catch the suspect.

Walgreens and CVS have closed multiple locations in California cities because of the losses.

As much as @bobknight33 spams far right stuff, it is understandable to consider this suspect. But in this case, it is actually a major epidemic.

Timestamps and films

0:00 28 Days Later
0:35 The Matrix
0:50 The Terminator
1:04 T2
1:09 Predator
1:12 Die Hard
1:25 Face Off
1:30 Predator
1:45 Die Hard
1:55 Rambo (not sure which one)
2:08 Die Hard
2:18 The Professional
2:35 Captain America: The Winter Soldier
3:22 Star Wars The Phantom Menace
3:28 Star Wars A New Hope
3:37 Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back
3:43 Die Hard
3:44 Platoon
3:46 Invasion of the Body Snatchers
3:56 Aliens
4:10 Highlander
4:44 The Right Stuff
5:14 Minority Report
5:19 Disclosure
5:38 2001 A Space Odyssey
5:56 Blade Runner
6:15 Patton
6:29 A Few Good Men
6:43 The Breakfast Club
7:06 Rain Man
7:20 Ghost
7:42 An Officer and a Gentleman
7:55 My Dinner with Andre
8:14 Sixteen Candles
8:18 Lost in Translation
8:23 Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back
8:35 Good Will Hunting
8:58 An American Tale
9:08 The Shinning
9:20 LOTR: The Two Towers
9:43 MTV- The Real World: Seattle
10:04 House Party
10:09 The Color of Money
10:14 Pulp Fiction
10:22 The Breakfast Club
10:26 Zardoz
10:29 Blazzing Saddles
10:32 MIB
10:34 Hook
10:36 The Beastmaster
10:41 Wallstreet
10:44 The Shawshank Redemption
10:51 The Fugitive
10:55 Pulp Fiction
11:10 The Ring
11:12 Vertigo
11:14 National Lampoon’s Vacation
11:35 Animal House
12:31 Good Will Hunting
12:44 Dead Poets Society

I'm impressed by how they manage to get all the reflective objects, even moving objects like cars, to reflect the right stuff.

Never mind the boring identification/police/citizen rights stuff....

what the fuck was up with his hat? Is his head massive or something?

Testing his resolve to see if he is stupid enough to be a suicide bomber
Does he have what it takes? IE, "the right stuff"

No kidding.

I just watched The Right Stuff for the first time today. My dad was a pilot. He taught me to fly at a very early age (landed my first plane at 5 years old!), and I love Flight Sims to death, but otherwise I never had the inclination to do the real thing as an adult. The older I get the more I want to though. Watching this video just makes me think this is the wildest ride in existence. Must be so much fun.

*promote the right stuff...and then some

I'm fairly certain, that once it's completed, Kerbal Space Program will easily rank among the greatest computer games ever created.

Neat video too. That's one of the great things about KSP. Not only do you get to create, learn something about engineering, but it also conveys the thrill, tragedy and triumph of exploration.

I still sometimes weep for Jebediah Kerbal. He had too much of the Right Stuff. He should never have boarded that rickety rocket, but he did anyways, that brave bastard. Now he's out there, somewhere. Forever exploring, with no way home.

Unless, of course, the Kraken got him.

At fist I thought this was rather crazy. If you would of asked in the roaring 20's if there come a day when they would be forced to deliver their gold to the government, they would of thought you a mad man. But then, it is 1933 and the depression is in full swing. Executive order 6102 is issued for all to see. Great economic disasters silence critics. Now that the dollar is a "world reserve" currency, the world itself owes to the stability of the dollar, more or less. Times aren't tuff enough for us to be able to politically demand the worlds gold, nor does this president have the "right stuff" to make such demands. And perhaps the US isn't in the right place in peoples minds to make this demand, or get away with it should I say. But tomorrow is not always like today. I can't even make a claim to the unlikeliness of this to occur. For sure, though, I don't Obama could "get away" with it. It would have to be a more populous candidate, and I see Obama more of an elite. I am not for this, mind you, I just like war gaming out possibilities, and this wasn't as crazy as I initially thought.

Due to entropy, the 2nd law of thermodynamics, etc, we know that there isn't such a thing as a perpetual motion machine. Everything which begins to exist does appear to end, including the Universe. For instance, the expansion of the Universe into heat death. A record player will wear out, a DVD player will break down. I believe that the temporal is temporary because it was created with a specific purpose which will end. After that, only that which is perfected and can co-exist with God eternally will remain.

Yes, talk of the eternal is intelligible. It doesn't mean we can't grasp a few concepts about it. One, it lasts forever, always has been, always will be. It never began to exist and it will never end. Two, it is essentially perfect, because it doesn't break down. It has no real flaw or weakness. It is self-contained and nothing could be added to it to make it better than it is in this sense.

Yes, you can doubt anything, but reality is orderly. It has a way which works and makes sense. I'm not sure why you believe time is only in the mind, because we can do very precise experiments on forces which show time as an emergent conception. What we perceive of time may be faulty, but clearly everything isn't happening at once; there is a logical progression to events which suggests time is more than in our minds.

As far as astronomical history you're talking about a history which is completely speculative and not based on observation, ie the origin of the moon, dinosaurs etc. If you doubt so much, why do you accept the secular narrative as truth? There are certain things such as the existence of the short period comets that proves a young earth. IE, if they're still here it means the Earth can't be that old. The secular narrative inserts the illusive and unobservable "Oort cloud" which supposedly replenishes all the comets.

Yes, I believe knowledge is certain and true, but I think you must see how limited beings with limited perceptions and knowledge take quite a bit on faith. Just in your normal life, you must see past your senses to navigate and interact with reality. You don't know everything that is going to happen, or even what you do know is even reliable, but you make the best of it. I don't see how anything could pass the "certainty" test.

I said what is spiritual couldn't be empircally proven, but I believe God has material evidence because He is a part of history. Where the rubber meets the road is the resurrection of Christ. God did interact with this world; He redeemed it. God isn't beholden to the world though, as if He needs anything..it is by Grace that He interacts with us. I will also tell you that God proves Himself. He promised to reveal Himself to those who come to Him in repentance of sin, who believe in Him and His resurrection and confess Him as Lord. To those He reveals Himself and grants eternal life. God can change a skeptic to a believer in a nanosecond, but He isn't going to show Himself to the world until the right time. What He wants is a heart willing to change, a broken and contrite heart coming to Him in total humility.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
@shinyblurry
There is no logical necessity for time to have an ending only because it had a beginning. A record player spinning with no end comes to mind. There is no reason to assume the end is necessarily destruction. A comparable analogy would be would be when a DVD is over; the fact that it has ended has nothing to do with its eradication. Either is plausible. There is also no reason to assume that something eternal will arise from temporal. It isn't impossible either, mind you, just not necessarily or shown to be the case.
I don't think it is possible to think about what is more plausible about eternity. We have no idea how to predicate eternity. We don't know "Being" is a consistent idea with "Eternal". Any type of talk about eternal is unintelligible. I don't mean that in a rude way, what I mean is I have no reason to believe anything that is said. If 2 things are logically possible, and I have no understanding of what it means to be eternal, then any talk about what is the more "likely" mode of an eternal metaphysics is a fruitless debate, rife with personal bias and little else.
And once again, this whole line of thought revolves around the very subjective idea of time. I have had no compelling argument to show time to be anything more than an experience of minds any more than the color blue. I have no reason to accept time as anything more than the way in which minds alter the information of the universe to make us more successful creatures.
I don't understand, beyond bias, why you would accept data about a young earth vs an old one with any less skepticism. Assuming they are using the same dating methods, why trust 10k year old earth and not 13 billion? The detective work that goes into the methods of age aren't perfect, prone to mis-calibration, and lack true modes to calibrate with, but it never claimed to be exact, just a rough cut. When they talk about the ages of dinosaurs, it usually has 50ish million year give or takes. Even our own solar history, and the history of our moon, and of Mars speak far more about a much older universe than a 10k year old one. I also can't see the Grand Canyon being made in 10k years. But isn't is a debate on the Christion bible, but on a more basic idea.
I am not an empiricist. I believe my classification is either a existential phenomenologist, or perhaps an transcendental idealist...most likely a combination of the two great schools of rationalism and empiricism. For me, knowledge is the same as Descartes put it. It is certain, and it is true. By certain, that means it passes Cartesian doubt. More to the point, it means that it has the right stuff to have an answer to every criticism. It is the opposite of doubt, it is certain. In that, religious evidence fails the certainty test, as the main element of all the great religions isn't knowledge, but faith. So to your point, prove that it can be known, with certainty and without any doubt any of the claims you have made, you would be the first in history to do so, to my knowledge. And to say that God can not be empirically proven seems rather lonely, for it means that God does not interact with this world; as empirical study is the world as it is beholden to man. If God is not beholden to the world which man exists, then he isn't really our God.

@shinyblurry

There is no logical necessity for time to have an ending only because it had a beginning. A record player spinning with no end comes to mind. There is no reason to assume the end is necessarily destruction. A comparable analogy would be would be when a DVD is over; the fact that it has ended has nothing to do with its eradication. Either is plausible. There is also no reason to assume that something eternal will arise from temporal. It isn't impossible either, mind you, just not necessarily or shown to be the case.

I don't think it is possible to think about what is more plausible about eternity. We have no idea how to predicate eternity. We don't know "Being" is a consistent idea with "Eternal". Any type of talk about eternal is unintelligible. I don't mean that in a rude way, what I mean is I have no reason to believe anything that is said. If 2 things are logically possible, and I have no understanding of what it means to be eternal, then any talk about what is the more "likely" mode of an eternal metaphysics is a fruitless debate, rife with personal bias and little else.

And once again, this whole line of thought revolves around the very subjective idea of time. I have had no compelling argument to show time to be anything more than an experience of minds any more than the color blue. I have no reason to accept time as anything more than the way in which minds alter the information of the universe to make us more successful creatures.

I don't understand, beyond bias, why you would accept data about a young earth vs an old one with any less skepticism. Assuming they are using the same dating methods, why trust 10k year old earth and not 13 billion? The detective work that goes into the methods of age aren't perfect, prone to mis-calibration, and lack true modes to calibrate with, but it never claimed to be exact, just a rough cut. When they talk about the ages of dinosaurs, it usually has 50ish million year give or takes. Even our own solar history, and the history of our moon, and of Mars speak far more about a much older universe than a 10k year old one. I also can't see the Grand Canyon being made in 10k years. But isn't is a debate on the Christion bible, but on a more basic idea.

I am not an empiricist. I believe my classification is either a existential phenomenologist, or perhaps an transcendental idealist...most likely a combination of the two great schools of rationalism and empiricism. For me, knowledge is the same as Descartes put it. It is certain, and it is true. By certain, that means it passes Cartesian doubt. More to the point, it means that it has the right stuff to have an answer to every criticism. It is the opposite of doubt, it is certain. In that, religious evidence fails the certainty test, as the main element of all the great religions isn't knowledge, but faith. So to your point, prove that it can be known, with certainty and without any doubt any of the claims you have made, you would be the first in history to do so, to my knowledge. And to say that God can not be empirically proven seems rather lonely, for it means that God does not interact with this world; as empirical study is the world as it is beholden to man. If God is not beholden to the world which man exists, then he isn't really our God.

@NetRunner I think the point is that if you want to not exist on tax dollars, you don't also get to legislate out competitors. They aren't exactly private or public either, one of those strange quazi-thingies. They still have to do things for the gubment like voter registration, carry certain forms. As such, they get certain government allowances that neither party uses to say they are "supported" by gubment money.

They loose money as well, perhaps it is time to let someone else take a stab at it? I deal with USPS nearly everyday, so there is a certain legacy attachment I feel for them. But in the end, it hardly seems fair to call yourself private and deny access to a job that other people could reasonably do. It is like Pan Am all over again. And if you can't turn a profit doing something no one else can do, something is amiss! Some things just don't have the right stuff, sad to say, USPS might be one of those.

I have tried to counter this argument with "Well maybe it is like utilities", but it really isn't...no amount of finite space or pipe clutter to worry about. And it would be nice to have options as well. As a reseller of cards, the post office is the ONLY option for me. I can find deals on envelopes, paper, boxes, ect. But I can't call around and find a bunch of kids to go "Mail" stuff over town for me at a discount rate to the post. In a world made of horses, maybe it made more sense. Otherwise, I think this exclusive privilege is just grasping at straws for needing to exist. If I could choose, maybe I would still choose them, hell, they are right next door. But if I could choose some silly kids on bikes to deliver my local stuff at a discount rate, maybe I would do that too. I would like the options. And I don't see any compelling reason to deny that option...stay roughing up the status quo.

Post office visits this year > 122

>> ^lord_null:

Only 9 shots. I'm not even buzzed.


You're not drinking the right stuff.

You ever get a chance to taste full cream milk from a cow vs the standard stuff in the store, I think most people would be surprised how far apart they are...

A local dairy produces fresh, un-homogenised milk (so the cream can separate) and the difference in taste between that and any of the major brands (which homogenise, use bulking agents, produce 20 different types of 'milk' etc) is surprising.

ps. Not far from the end of the vid there is a real "Right Stuff" moment when you see the old Kiwi and a number of older Indian chaps walking down the road together... ; )

This is why, if you want to be a cop, and want to do all the good "right" stuff, you should have your id-tag visible at all times. If it were after me everybody of these guys would have it spraypainted all over them. I can understand that every now and then a person in charge has to "bend" things a bit if his "customer" is more of a dick than has to be and these guys face shit all the time so who can blame them when they blow a valve.

The problem is the principle of anonymity inherent in most situations where the "authority" is directly interacting with a suspect lends itself to willful violent actions both on the side of its bearer as well as its agitator.

Solution: stuff all cops into clearly labeled, pink teddybear costumes! I won't throw shit at that- 'd be too busy laughing my ass off.