1v1 mid to 5v5 is like checkers to chess, so I'd be interested to see if it can also master all of that.

It's curious how aggressive it plays. When you watch AlphaGo I think one of the defining features of it was that didn't look for huge leads because the margin of victory is meaningless. OpenAI seems totally different, it practices a sort of brinkmanship that is almost human. The games I've seen it lose were because of moves that actually did seem very human - it went all in up high ground and got unlucky for instance. I'd have somewhat expected it to evaluate doing that as an unnecessary risk when it can just extend its advantage in other ways... but then maybe it is overestimating the ability of its human opponents to keep up with last hits and raze placement.

Very analogous to Westboro Baptist "church" stooges. They (ab)use their constitutionally protected rights to free speech to say the most offensive and provocative crap that they can come up with, specifically with the intention to incite a (violent) reaction against them. Why? Because pretty much the entire Phelps family are lawyers, and they know that they can generally win any assault case that they can provoke people into. All that hate they spew boils down to a stupid, petty moneymaking scam.

Is the Seattle Nazi that devious and cunning? I doubt it. Probably just a crazy / fucked up guy, as Maher said. That doesn't excuse his fuckwittery, but it does reinforce Maher's argument that punching the guy is NOT the best response.

Morello is awesome, with RATM and Audioslave, and now Prophets of Rage, etc. But he's dead wrong on this issue, and comes across as a bit of an "internet tough guy". Outside of just ignoring them, I kinda think the only way to one-up these people is to know the law, what constitutes assault etc., and essentially beat them at their own game (ie. provoke them into doing something to you). On the other hand, there's something to be said for using using passive-aggressive snark to mock / humiliate them in a nonviolent way, ala the Foo Fighters:

Well, that's what I was taught were proofs, even if just proving simple addition....but that shouldn't be an introduction to math, I got them in geometry/algebra 2 my sophomore year.
Well, kids not understanding basic math isn't new either, senior year remedial math existed when I was in school, but wasn't the norm. If your assessment is correct, that's pretty sad.

All that said, I got paddled in 5th grade for insisting 4-5=-1. My teacher didn't understand negative numbers. Just saying, poor educators aren't a new thing, but they do suck ass.

The big problem is education is so politicised now that it's near impossible to figure out what's actually being taught and what stories are pure hyperbole. Here in the U.S. we've heard all kinds of insane claims about 'common core', most of which were bullshit, because making a federal standard for education wasn't what many wanted (how dare they tell us the war of northern aggression was about slavery, these slanderous accusations will not stand, sir) so a movement was born to oppose it by all means possible, which usually meant outrageous lies.
I'm really glad I don't have kids in school, I would probably home school them if I did.

Ignoring the rambling narrator, the few numbers we can see say even 200 GtC passes the tipping point in over 1/3 of models, assuming emissions peak soon, decline to current levels by 2030 and then decline much faster (all total pie in the sky optimism) hits 2 degrees rise by 2100, and the best case scenario estimate with aggressive mitigation (that we aren't doing) and as yet uninvented technology is 250-540GtC.
That's total failure and unavoidable doom.

Let me disabuse you of some of your assumptions...

I didn't do gamergate and I don't really give a fuck about feminism/anti-feminism as it pertains to how I treat women in the real world (that being egalitarian, everyone should be equal).

Now that that's out of the way, yeah, I am for fucking real. Whether it was a stunt or just a bunch of people turning up to a talk which they paid their money to get in to, it doesn't really matter. Sarkessian was the aggressor (unless you truly believe that threaten = criticise someone's ideas online then show up in person to let them have their say), using a position of power, backed up by a bunch of like minded people to abuse paying attendees who's only crime was sitting up the front and listening quietly, which they are entitled to do.

/shockfuckinghorror, never mind free speech, you can't even listen to people anymore without them wetting their pants in terror.

There is plenty of video footage of said event and you are more than welcome to point out to me exactly where in that footage any of the so called aggressors did anything actually aggressive. Aka, the point where my opinion of what went on is different to the reality. I don't need to convince people of the reality of the situation, I can just roll the footage.

She broke the code of conduct, and while other YT'ers were being ejected for being in public areas (a breach of the CoC), she was given an explicit pass by the Greens. Sargon and the rest of the so called aggressors were not ejected or banned from Vidcon which indicates to me that they did nothing wrong in the eyes of the organisers. The aggressors seemed to get along fine with other people they met that they ideologically disagree with, with no other incidents being recorded. Sark, on the other hand, also verbally abused Boogie2988, one of the nicest and most considerate people I've seen on YT, and someone who had gone out of his way not to offend her.

All this is a matter of record, not my opinion. So now comes the question of your integrity. Are you going to actually back up your claims with a little actual evidence, or are you just going to go back to calling names... ; P

Are you for real?

Do you not see that you are literally gaslighting by attempting to paint an individual, who organized a stunt aimed at intimidating another person in public, as the victim of the incident?

I don't even give a shit about gamergate or the feminism/anti-feminism celebrity battle that you, clearly, have taken a side on. I don't support anyone involved because all of the participants appear to be acting like asshats. But any objective viewer can see that one side made a bold move to aggressively provoke an opponent and succeeded in their goal of getting a response. It was bullying and abusive and it illicited an undignified response.

Let me reiterate, I am not your opposition in your crazy war. But I have to point out that it is a perplexing bit of mental acrobatics for you to attempt to perpetuate a false reality by accusing an intended victim of trying to perpetuate a false reality.

That's a clown move and if you had any integrity you would pause a moment for a little self examination.

I used to have pongy arm pits but then read about aggressive soap disrupting the flora of the armpit to favour smelly bacteria. So now just clean daily with warm water and avoid under arm deodorants completely and now i have a mild 'nice smelling' armpits - assuming my GF doesn't have olfactory dysfunction.

Part of the problem with unnecessary formula use is that the mother can stop producing milk. The act of breastfeeding lets the mom's body know it should keep making milk for the next mealtime.

If you give a poor person a week's worth of formula, they might just stop lactating. Then they're *stuck* buying formula until the baby can be weaned from the bottle.

I don't know how true it is, but this was part of the accusations surrounding Nestle's aggressive formula marketing.

They don't get a bonus, they avoid a reprimand for not meeting quotas.

For profit prison means all those costs are more reason to lock people up, not reason to avoid imprisonment. Yes, it costs us, but makes money for police departments and prisons. The prison guard union is one of the most aggressive, well funded, and successful lobbies in Washington.
That's the profit he's talking about. No one pays for a recovered missing person, but there's money to be had incarcerating a pot smoker. Engage your brain before you spout ridiculousness....if you have the capability.

Brilliant conflict resolution skills i must say. He talked that aggressive jerk back to reason.

You are wrong.
ANYTHING you say will be used against you. Time and time again officers use "hello" and "no, I don't know why you pulled me over" as excuse for escalation, claiming aggressive or impaired demeanor.

Rights only exist if exercised. They can and should be applied at all times. If they can only be invoked when one is guilty, then exercising them IS an indication of guilt, so that's not how they work.

She clearly told them what she was doing, there was no bank robbery, and she didn't look comatose or impaired.

This is nothing like your douchbag friends. They intentionally created suspicion, she stood on her right to avoid any suggestion of suspicion, and was arrested for contempt of cop plain and simple. There is no charge of "won't answer incriminating questioning"....not in America, maybe in China and North Korea.

Again, you show you simply don't understand legal rights....are you a cop?

So, you think it's proper to be arrested on suspicion of......nothing....based on a cop's biased judgement on how you look, but with ZERO crime committed?!? I'm incredibly glad you aren't a judge.

The really sad part is, this woman may get more for this violation than the family of the black man murdered for following officer's directions to get his ID....they got $3 million, but she's a white lawyer, so may fare far better in our system.

Fascinating. I can't help but feel a bit sad for the man. But there are some aspects of his testimony that leave me scratching my head:

"[T]he administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI by saying that the organization was in disarray, that it was poorly led, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader. Those were lies, plain and simple."

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/08/full-text-james-comey-trump-russia-testimony-239295

"Yet there is a growing consensus that Comey has wielded the powers of the directorship more aggressively than anyone since Hoover—to the consternation, and even anger, of some of his colleagues."

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/james-comey-fbi-accountability-214234

"Mr. Comey got so many calls from former agents and others after he decided this summer not to pursue charges that he had to change his phone number posted online. And at a recent meeting with retired agents, he was still fielding tough questions about the decision."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/29/us/politics/fbi-clinton-emails-james-comey.html

I think it's fair to say that Comey helped to create a "turbulent" atmosphere at the FBI during the past year, one probably not matched since the firing of William Sessions in 1993.

I wish someone had thought to ask him what he'd imagine the results of the "hopes, loyalty and leaks" would have been if he hadn't been fired.

Nope, those traits are antithetical to business too, probably why no one does business with him twice.

Paris accord, purely voluntary based on goals we set ourselves. Clearly he didn't understand it at all. It only costs us money if we want it to, and it only asks us to do what we ask of ourselves, with no enforcement at all. Interesting to note that the word "coal" is not in it, contrary to what someone seems to have told Trump...that it forces us to abandon coal while other countries can continue to adopt it.

You know Trump wants to leave NATO, probably because Putin wants him to so it will not be able to stand against more aggressive Russian expansion. Is a Soviet Europe cheaper than paying a bit more to NATO, or should we dismantle it just because Greece can't pay and ignore the consequences?

Europe no longer sees us as the leaders of the free world. For all your b.s. about Obama, Trump has ruined our international reputation in under 6 months more than even Fox claimed Obama had in 8 years.

In America, you have every right to ignore them unless they give a lawful command, which you must obey. They cannot arrest you for silence, or for ignoring a request. I'll take my brother's expensive lawyer's advice over anyone's, and he said the only answer allowed is "ask my lawyer", and to do what they command, but not what they ask.

The girl wasn't aggressively pushing to me, but she also wasn't complying with a lawful command. If the audio is any indication, she was trying to get her phone out of her pocket while lying down handcuffed. She should have complied, but they also should have put her all the way in like they're trained to do, not 3/4 of the way. It's easy and safe to open the other door and pull her another foot into the car where she can't block anything, and that doesn't result in a lawsuit and more public distrust, but that wouldn't teach her a lesson. Pepper spray is not as safe as that by far.

It's not cool to hate cops, and I really wish they would stop getting caught doing things that foster hatred. I want them to act in a way the public can always support, not the least patient and most aggressive they can legally justify in every situation. It would be good if they could be thinking 'how would I feel if someone did this to my daughter/son under the same conditions.
I doubt any of them would be ok with that happening to their child, tantrum or no. They could have been worse here, but also could have defused it all with a single simple command to sit at the beginning. Don't expect an irrational, young, scared girl to act like an adult...that's beyond the capabilities of most adults.

You can humbly submit to authority if you wish. My forefathers fought and died to secure my rights to not answer questions or submit to the every whim of authority, I'll not disrespect their sacrifices by waiving those hard won rights for authority's, or my own convenience.

It would be nice if 15 year old girls were civil, but few I've known are when cornered. I think that's the real reason for the spraying, but not an excuse imo. To me, the cop's pride needs to give way to reason and logic, or we'll keep paying out multi million dollar judgements.