While smart to wear one I also agree it shouldn't be a law. It's the same as helmet laws which vary from state to state proving that it's not really a public safety issue so much as a reason for the cops to have (yet another) tool in their toolbox to collect additional revenue and potentially escalate the crime.

No Netflix for me, and no luck on a quick search of torrents, but I'll keep my eye out for that show/series.

Many metrics to compare. Ecologically, that system sounds great for static locations with enough of an elevation gradient and reservoir areas to make it work. On the other hand it seems like the ecological damage done by constructing batteries, factories, and disposing of them is likely quite small compared to many other alternatives, particularly fossil fuels (which also have long-term scarcity concerns on top of plenty of other issues).

A major advantage of battery tech over hydro storage would be mobility. If the thing consuming energy doesn't sit in one place, hydro storage won't work. Another somewhat less significant advantage is the ability to install anywhere -- a battery farm recharged by mains and/or a solar/wind farm could be installed in places where hydro storage couldn't. And for one more item in favor of batteries, I'd wager that the land area footprint required for batteries is much smaller per kWH stored, although that might be wrong for extremely large reservoirs (ie. a hydroelectric dam, pretty much). But by the time you're getting to that large scale, the location requirements and ecological disruption are also much more extreme.

Anyway, I don't mean to pooh-pooh the idea of hydro storage -- it really does seem like a very good and ingenious idea where it would be applicable. But there's certainly room for improved battery tech, too. I don't think that we're going to get fully or even significantly weaned off of fossil fuels quite as fast as the video would have us hope for, either. Fossil fuels were the primary tool in our toolbox for a LONG time. And as the saying goes, since all we've had is that "hammer", we've started to think of everything as a nail.

So, basically, the next Dark Souls.

Which is fine, because I enjoy those games. Character and enemy designs look great, but at this point they're just regurgitating a formula. It looks foreboding, it's probably going to be brutally difficult, there will be some interesting monsters and probably a convoluted, western-style dark fantasy plot. That's the same thing that Demon's Souls, Dark Souls and Dark Souls 2 offered to a 'T'.
Someone no one else has ever agreed with me from the game industry is personal reinvention, and I wish consumer demand was more fickle for less repetitive offerings.
I *might* play this, but after 3 games, multiple playthroughs of each (because I loved them so much), I'm pretty much over it. Plus, fuck next gen consoles, I could have gotten another 5 years from the current crop. I expect truly talented developers to innovate when they're lauded for their perceived innovation from past successes. Tackling an entirely different genre in the same way the *Souls games were throwbacks to more unforgiving times, or taking the extremes from the previous entries to completely unexpected heights.
There are so many fucking vectors of unexplored progress in the medium that it never surprises me when industry reports year-over-year declines for half a decade, and infuriates me to the point that I wish it would all just fucking die already, wipe out the failures, and rebuild it with this millenniums version of the NES. It's not even about finding "completely new, unexplored methods of interactive media", because you can continue to build on the genre's that exist with a 4-decade-old toolbox that an entire industry only recognizes the most recently opened drawer of.

...aaaaand if wasn't for programmed, systemic societal dysfunction your attitudes towards a tool in a toolbox wouldn't be as remedial and absurd at face-value.

If you eat too much dirt you'll die, therefore, to keep crazies from eating dirt, we'll keep 'em away from dirt....Brilliant, son-You yourself ever been evaluated by a mental health professional??

You completely misread my post (big surprise). This is another one of those distinctions that make no pragmatic difference. What does distinguishing between"believers" and "deniers" do for cleaning the air (and cleaning the environment)? Do "believers" contribute less to smog, greenhouse gasses, pollution, etc.? I remember driving to NYC from Boston and noticing the filthy brown/grey cloud enveloping the city as visible as you approached it. Is that because all NYC dwellers are "climate change deniers?" How about the L.A. smog? These are real problems, much more so than some "climate change believers" whose predictive models keep proving to be inaccurate.

Of course, as is pointed out here, "denier" is simply a shaming slur, and "climate change" is yet another tool in the hypocrite's toolbox to "prove" how much we need the rulers to save you from the weather.

Meteorology has many many variables that need to be considered, making it next-to-impossible to conduct experiments under controlled conditions in order to prove or falsify your theories. The pragmatic response then, is to ask what are you (going to) do(ing) about it (with it being whatever the article says)?

(In other words, it looks like the Prius came into being about 135 years too late.)

Bottom line is, if "man-made catastrophic climate change" is not happening, then society needs to stop listening to politicians and other hypocrites. If "man-made catastrophic climate change" is happening, then society needs to stop listening to politicians and other hypocrites if it wants to put a stop to it. And also take a good look at their own behaviors and contributions to waste and pollution because "belief" or not makes ZERO DIFFERENCE; only actual behavior makes a difference.

With a name like Jimmy Joe it's a wonder he didn't think to practice over the swimmin' hole down by the kreek ... toolbox

>> ^VoodooV:

Well I'll grant you that everyone has some sort of ideology that at least motivates them to learn new things. But when it blatantly colors every aspect of your analysis, then you're a joke. I checked out their website when QM made his latest rant. They don't even put up a front that they care about their analysis more than their ideology.
Quite honestly, IMO, anyone who claims be a scientist should be apolitical. science should be above politics


Well, think tanks are more like engineers than scientists. They have problems they want to solve, and so they do research and use scientific findings to try to build something that will solve their problem.

Again, some think tanks go about this properly, and try not to delude themselves or others about the nature of reality. Others consider deception a valid tool to use in their toolbox.

Which is to say, having an opinion on how things should be does not automatically make someone dishonest. I don't really understand why people buy into the propaganda telling you otherwise.

AFAIK, Keynote (and iWork) won't run on windows (your only option with Sony)
You can run windows apps on Macs using Parallels, VMware Fusion, or VirtualBox. (I've used all of them, the newest parallels is about the best feature wise, but costs money where virtualbox is free. Vmware has a free Player for other OS, but not for mac). You can also dual-boot a mac to windows, but this is less convenient.

The macbook air has a max memory limit of 4GB. This might limit your work in Matlab, depending on the toolboxes you use and the datasets you create. Also, the macbook air does NOT have a firewire 800 port, so if you want to use an external hard drive, you are stuck with USB 2.0. I also heard the new Airs have some technical problems, so I agree that you should wait a few months.

I would suggest a Macbook Pro, but this has 13" screen, and is over 3lbs.

So if those are both "must have" requirements, then the only thing you can get is the 11" MacBook Air. Those only have an SSD option, and between the OS, AutoDesk, and Matlab, will start to quickly fill that 64 or 128GB capacity (more like 120 after formatting).

Don't forget to buy the $29 mini-displayPort to VGA adapter if you are going to use this for presentations - most places still have VGA connections on projectors. (monoprice has one that is slightly cheaper and also works fine)

How silly.

What economic issue is it that this video is claiming is the Fed's fault?

Income inequality? Good argument for a more progressive tax, and a larger system of social welfare.

Fraud? Good argument for a strong regulatory regime for banks, and a Fed chair who's got a basic mistrust of corporate greed.

Inflation? Maybe, but it seems like low, constant inflation is a good thing in everyone's theory of macroeconomics, and a central bank is a key tool for keeping your inflation where you want it.

Unemployment? Maybe, but again, fixing your money supply to some constant (e.g. pegged to the dollar, or the dollar pegged to gold) takes a big tool for managing unemployment out of your toolbox.

Mostly though, people need to remember that all money is ultimately fake.

Gold is just as worthless as paper money -- you can't eat it, you can't smoke it, you can't drink it, you can't even use it as a raw material for anything useful unless you're a jeweler, a dentist, or a semiconductor fabricator (and even then, you really should use something more common like copper or tin).

Money is a consensual hallucination meant to keep us all working. I'm really, really sorry if you reached adult age thinking that stuffing cash into your mattress was the route to riches.

Rich people understand that cash is intrinsically worthless. It's why they invest, rather than build giant Scrooge McDuck-style money bins full of coins.

All money is the same, whether it's in the form of stamped $20 gold coins, promissory notes (i.e. a green piece of paper that says "this $20 bill can be redeemed for an ounce of gold at the US treasury office"), or fiat currency, it's only worth whatever you can buy with $20.

Part of basic financial literacy is understanding that the overall trend is for prices to go up, and therefore that if you aren't getting a raise equal to or greater than the inflation rate every year, you're taking a pay cut.

Which is a good argument for unionizing, even if you're a salaried professional...

He even had a toolbox! I mean, whenever I see a guy with a toolbox I instantly think "Now there's a guy I can trust with my password".

I was waiting for him to say 'WHY SO SERIOUS?' and release poison gas from his toolbox

Ha ha! His life is shit!

Maybe he was a little jerk like I was when I was that age (I want the micro machines toolbox city! x20 times a day for 4 weeks).

Although the parents probably could afford an Xbox, they just prefer to spend their money on cigarettes and booze or church donations.

Pretty good, but bad acting, some of the effects were lazily done (when he's carrying the toolbox at the beginning, there are bad cutouts for his hands and the motion tracking ain't great, the blood is BAD, etc), and the dudes mustache NEEDS TO GO!

-edit- oh, and yeah, like that guy said, the sentry needs to be blue...

Otherwise, make more!

>> ^deathcow:
She has a video where she's stuffing tools in there also.


That would be this one http://www.videosift.com/video/The-bra-as-a-toolbox

I'm getting the impression she likes to show off her boobs... Does she have a whole YouTube Channel with videos like this?

>> ^dannym3141:
What a dark day in world affairs when all it takes for us to consider something a witty retort is for a leader to answer a reporter's question with A SENSIBLE FUCKING ANSWER. Move along people, all this does is make me feel better about thinking obama is NOT a toolbag, and that bush was a toolbag inside a toolbox.
Churchill:
Lady Nancy Astor: Winston, if I were your wife, I’d poison your tea.
Churchill: Nancy, if I were your husband, I’d drink it
BOOM.
Bessie Braddock: Sir, you are drunk.
Churchill: And you, madam, are ugly. But in the morning, I shall be sober.
POW.
Young man (after seeing Churchill leave the bathroom without washing his hands): At Eton they taught us to wash our hands after using the toilet.
Churchill: At Harrow they taught us not to piss on our hands.
KAPOW.
Let's get some real fucking genius wit back into politics, can we? (no, this doesn't demonstrate churchill's genius, but trust me he was)


1) You're comparing Churchill's private conversations to a news conference by Obama.
2) Those quotes by Churchill are all unsourced. We don't know if they actually happened. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill