I prefer the earlier PMJ version of this, because Kate Davis has a beautiful Patsy-Cline-ish-country-soul voice that works well with this particular arrangement (and she plays the bass) but this is still excellent. And I will be at their London gig this Sunday!

Basically I'll throw in my opinion, which is really just to parrot someone else's... I'm guessing me and @eric3579 have fairly close to the same layout--screen wise (size or perspective), resolution wise, and so on. Since I have the same issues and concerns eric has (like channels and other "inclusions" a video belongs in). Right now it is harder to find some of the details for the videos posted--or they need to be in a more simpler and easier to access spot (but, as noted--this may be due to a size/resolution issue; since I don't know if everything scales correctly yet); which makes me hesitant to make any changes to any videos. But, as noted (and as I found out later on) the opt-in opt-out buttons are found nearby, allowing me to figure out what I need to, until we decide on a fully finished product.

One question I might ask is, does the new site--as of right now--already scale correctly no matter what resolution you are at? So if you go WAY up into the "4K" range, will the site look really bizarre (I know that there will already be far more "space"; but, is it setup right now to arrange all the site items to display in their correct positions)? Inversely, for a long time cellphones were forcing site admins to create a mobile edition of their website(s); but, thanks to smartphones (plus their fast CPUs, and 1080p screens) this is being phased out.

Keep chomping at the bit @lucky760; I'm sure with our feedback and your willingness to get this finished so quickly will indeed help us get more than likely a bit of what we all want out of this (making the community as a whole basically happy with the finished product; and as mentioned, hopefully helping newer users). Keep up the good job.

Yup, it's a lucky co-incidence. That's what you get when you place lots of vertical planes in that arrangement, ie steps..

Not a credentialed physicist, but I'll give it a shot.
The metallic magnets make contact with the positive and negative on the battery and feed electricity to the coil, that induces a magnetic field in the coil. With the magnets arranged properly, the field in the coil likely attracts the 'front' one and repels the 'rear' one, making the 'train' move, and taking the induced field with it.

(If I'm wrong, please correct me)

This is unbelievable. In this video some PEOPLE are stopping some other PEOPLE from giving food to hungry PEOPLE. Did they get so obsessed with their shiny blue uniform that they forgot that they were people with freedom to choose whether to let hungry people eat or not?

I feel like if i'd been one of the police there, i'd have had a sudden existential crisis - what the fuck have i been convinced to do here? I'm here in an authoritative capacity to stop desperate, hungry people from getting access to food. Shit, i'd have tried to organise a mass human shield around them.

I think everyone should take 5 seconds and just think exactly how this came to pass - from the law being written by the guys we endorsed, right down to the chain of command commanding these people apparently raised to obey orders unflinchingly - and then collectively feel embarrassed about it.

Sure, this may have been avoided if the proper 'housing'(?) could be arranged and it may have been inexpensive, but did it really fucking need to when it was going more smoothly than anything the government could have arranged?

"diatomic arrangement is a dying art"
Oh the unintentional irony. Thanks to ocean acidification, diatoms are having a harder time surviving, and there is less and less diversity daily, so it is literally a dying art.
Beautiful.

To quote the great Wittgenstein "meaning is use". Language and meaning are nuanced and complicated, but most of all, subjective and instrumental (by which I mean something we make up). This is why we frequently use otherwise restrictive and oversimplified analogies to illustrate specific points, and sometimes arbitrary (and always artificial) terms to sum up otherwise much more expansive phenomena.

In this case @Babymech used one to quite neatly surmise the different ways we interpret accidental puns and double meanings. Crude vs Prude was just a succinct way of labelling the two predominant archetypical responses to a potential double entendre.

One is to tend to overlook or ignore it (Prude)
One is to recognise and even call attention to it (Crude)

There were no value judgements implicit in the way @Babymech did this. You brought those yourself, projected them outwards and rather rudely set about insulting Babymech for the perceived slight/prejudicial remark.

The fact you got a rude response back was not validation, it was retaliation. You called him/her a dick basically without provocation!

"In some countries / regions, saying someone is crude is quite the insult."

A term charged with historical prejudicial hatred indeed! Absolutely no room for interpretation or innocent intention there. (And God forbid anyone anywhere ever be offended by something because they might have different associations with a words meanings and associations)

But let's just assume @Babymech was making a value judgement anyway. "Prude" and "Crude" create wildly varying emotional responses. From pride to shame. Who takes prescient? Who's right to not be offended counts most?

Much like considerably more sensitive words (like ones beginning with N and F for instance), context is absolutely everything. Words have no meaning outside of their context, they are entirely relativistic things. Even the cold hard definition in a dictionary is a contextual arrangement (in this case the dictionary & the linguistic paradigm which is documents).

If there was hatred in Babymech's heart when he/she made their comment I certainly did not recognise it. The same point made in a different way might have raised my ire too, but here I can only see a slight you brought to the table yourself so to speak.

I've done it myself before, but then I've also apologised for starting shit that wasn't really there before too

You would be correct if you detected a slightly snotty attitude in my reply, it pops up mostly when people start throwing around unsolicited abuse (or say unspeakably dumb things but I'm certainly not accusing you of that here, just a needless conflict). You'd be amazed how fast it can disappear though!

Much love.

Up until I saw my fellow countrymen (including many I respected) fawning like chimps at a tea party during that whole "jubilee" thing I might have agreed. There seems to be a huge cognitive dissonance for most people when it comes to the royals.

On the one hand most don't really take it very seriously, on the other many (maybe even most) appear to have a sub-conscious desire/need to submit to their natural betters. Our whole national identity is built on the myths of Kings and failed rebellions and I fear for many the Monarchy represents a kind of bizarre political security blanket. We claim to not really care but deep down I think many of us secretly fear loosing our mythical matriarch.

One might liken it to celebrity worship backed by 100's & 1000's of years of religious mythology. The Royal's aren't really human to us, they are more like some closely related parent species born to a life we could only dream of. I realise that when asked directly most people would consciously acknowledge that was silly, but most would also respond the same to say Christian sexual repression. They know sex and nakedness when considered rationally are nothing to be ashamed of, but they still continue to treat their own urges as somehow sinful when they do not fall within rigidly defined social parameters.

We still haven't gotten over such Judeo-Christian self policing because the social structures built up around it are still with us (even if we fool ourselves into thinking we are beyond the reach of such sub-conscious influences). I don't think we will ever get over our master-slave culture while class and unearned privilege are still built into the fabric of our society. Having a Royal family, no matter how symbolic, is the very living embodiment of this kind of backwards ideology.

It's like trying to quit heroin while locked in a room with a big bag of the stuff.

It's true to say most don't take the whole thing very seriously but that to me is almost as concerning. Most people when asked don't believe advertising has a significant effect on their psyche but Coke-a-cola still feels like spending about 3 billion a year on it is worthwhile. One of them is clearly mistaken!

Our royal family here, is to me working in the same way as coke's advertising. It's a focal point for a lot of sub-conscious concepts we are bombarded with our whole lives. Naturally there are many sides to this and it wouldn't work without heavy media manipulation, state indoctrination etc. but it's an intrinsic part of the coercive myth none the less. Monarch's, Emperors and wealthy Dynasties are all poisons to me. No matter the pragmatic details, the sub-conscious effect seems significant and cumulative.

"Dead" symbolisms IMHO can often be the most dangerous. At least one is consciously aware of the devils we see. No one is watching the one's we have forgotten.....

The above is reason enough for me but I have bog all better to do this aft so I'll dive into the rabbithole a bit.....

(We do very quickly start getting into conspiracy theory territory hare so I'll try to keep it as uncontroversial as I can.)

A. The UK is truly ruled by financial elites not political ones IMHO. "The city" says jump, Whitehall says how high. The Royal family being among the wealthiest landowners and investors in the world (let alone UK) presumably can exert the same kind of influence. Naturally this occurs behind closed doors, but when the ownership class puts it's foot down the government ignores them to their extreme detriment. (It's hard to argue with people who own your economy de-facto and can make or break your career)

B. The queen herself sits on the council on foreign relations & Bilderberg group and she was actually the chairwoman of the "committee of 300" for several years. (and that's not even starting on club of Rome, shares in Goldman Sachs etc.)

C. SIS the uk's intelligence services (MI5/6 etc.), which have been proven to on occasion operate without civilian oversight in the past, are sworn to the crown. This is always going to be a most contentious point as it's incredibly difficult to prove wrongdoings, but I have very strong suspicions based on various incidents (David Kelly, James Andanson, Jill Dando etc.), that if they wanted/needed you dead/threatened that would not be especially difficult to arrange.

D. Jimmy Saville. This one really is tin foil hat territory, but it's no secret he was close to the Royal family. I am of the opinion this is because he was a top level procurer of "things", for which I feel there is a great deal of evidence, but I can't expect people to just go along with that idea. However given the latest "paedogeddon" scandal involving a extremely high level abuse ring (cabinet members, mi5/6, bankers etc.) it certainly would come as little surprise to find royal family members involved.

Points A&B I would stand behind firmly. C&D are drifting into conjecture but still potentially relevant I feel.

But even if we ignore all of them, our culture is built from the ground up upon the idea of privilege of birth. That there are some people born better or more deserving than the rest of us. When I refer to symbolism this is what I mean. Obviously the buck does not stop with the monarchy, England is hopelessly stratified by class all the way through, but the royal family exemplify this to absurd extremes.

At best I feel this hopelessly distorts and corrupts our collective sense of identity on a sub-conscious level. At worst....Well you must have some idea now how paranoid I'm capable of being about the way the world is run. (Not that I necessarily believe it all wholeheartedly, but I'm open to the possibility and inclined to suggest it more likely than the mainstream narrative)


On a pragmatic note: Tourism would be fine without them I think, we still have the history and the castles and the soldiers with silly hats etc. And I think the palaces would make great hotels and museums. They make great zoo exhibits I agree, just maybe not let them continue to own half the zoo and bribe the zoo keepers?


Anyway much love as always. You responded with considered points which is always worthy of respect, regardless of whether I agree with it all.

Yeah, I don't get the contradiction either. You want to be happy, and god wants you to be happy too. Doing good makes both parties happy, so do it. Mutually beneficial arrangement... that's an easy way to interpret it and I'm sure what she meant.
I know a lot of Christians are going nuts over this though, because doing good (or anything) for yourself is apparently the most blasphemous thing ever... everything you do, do it for God's glory and all that.

That's some *quality vocals and arrangements, right there!

lucky760's reasoning is sound.

Anyone that has researched and/or trained on weapon on weapon defense, in this case knife vs. firearm knows the Tueller's Drill. It has been a standard for over thirty years. Basically,

The Tueller Drill is a self-defense training exercise to prepare against a short-range knife attack when armed only with a holstered handgun.
Sergeant Dennis Tueller, of the Salt Lake City, Utah Police Department wondered how quickly an attacker with a knife could cover 21 feet (6.4 m), so he timed volunteers as they raced to stab the target. He determined that it could be done in 1.5 seconds. These results were first published as an article in SWAT magazine in 1983 and in a police training video by the same title, "How Close is Too Close?"[1]
A defender with a gun has a dilemma. If he shoots too early, he risks being charged with murder. If he waits until the attacker is definitely within striking range so there is no question about motives, he risks injury and even death. The Tueller experiments quantified a "danger zone" where an attacker presented a clear threat.[2]
The Tueller Drill combines both parts of the original time trials by Tueller. There are several ways it can be conducted:[3]
The "attacker and shooter are positioned back-to-back. At the signal, the attacker sprints away from the shooter, and the shooter unholsters his gun and shoots at the target 21 feet (6.4 m) in front of him. The attacker stops as soon as the shot is fired. The shooter is successful only if his shot is good and if the runner did not cover 21 feet (6.4 m).
A more stressful arrangement is to have the attacker begin 21 feet (6.4 m) behind the shooter and run towards the shooter. The shooter is successful only if he was able take a good shot before he is tapped on the back by the attacker.
If the shooter is armed with only a training replica gun, a full-contact drill may be done with the attacker running towards the shooter. In this variation, the shooter should practice side-stepping the attacker while he is drawing the gun.
Mythbusters covered the drill in the 2012 episode "Duel Dilemmas". At 20 feet the gun wielder was able to shoot the charging knife attacker just as he reached the shooter. At shorter distances the knife wielder was always able to stab prior to being shot. (Wikipedia)

That a firearm, particularly a handgun, will instantly incapacitate an individual is not a working concept and is fallacious. Variables such as adrenaline and drugs are attributable. Shot placement is trumps. Anything but a CNS. central nervous system, shot is not efficacious in safely stopping the threat. Not an easy or sure target sans movement, stress, etc.

Law enforcement put their lives and safety in harm's way every day. They are not there to die needlessly. An individual with suicide by cop or a LEO's death in mind is a serious threat to be dealt with with prejudice.

By the way, research knife wounds vs. handgun wounds. There is much data, ER, medical examiner, law enforcement. The deadly seriousness of knife wounds are well documented.

Tasers...I would not want to risk my life behind one or anyone about whom I care.

Your video, Sail - Awolnation - Sea Shanty Arrangement, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Interesting. I find that I learn MUCH better with Rocksmith than I do from a straight tab. I hate the difficulty levels; I'd rather just show ALL of the notes ALL of the time (although that is easily fixed by just selecting the whole song and turning up the difficulty to 100%), but riff repeater plus slowing a song down to 60% or so (depending on how tough the bits are) has been my new ideal way of learning more difficult songs.

But for bass at least, I find that I'm able to sight-read the majority of songs to 97%+ accuracy. Probably 9 out of 10 new songs that I try, even if I've never looked at a tab before, I can get that kind of accuracy with the Rocksmith note highway / tab hybrid.

I do agree that sometimes it would be nice to be able to pause and just show a pure tab, to have more time to prepare and anticipate what things are coming. I know of two things to assist with that:

1) I know that there is a program that somebody put together that can read Rocksmith .psarc files and automatically create a tab text file from the song's arrangements. I can't recall the name of it, but I know it exists -- I've seen people talking about it at www.customsforge.com, the community for creating custom Rocksmith DLC tracks. I'll do some searching and see if I can find the exact name of that program for you.

2) As an alternative to Rocksmith if you prefer reading tabs but like playing along with the recording, check out "Go Playalong", which you can use to sync a guitar pro or powertab format tab with an .mp3 or other audio file and do Rocksmith-like features like slowing down, etc. but with the cursor scrolling through a traditional text-based tab. I sometimes use this also, but overall I prefer Rocksmith now. Works quite a bit like GuitarPro, but the cursor scrolling through the song is more intelligent about keeping bars ahead of your current position in view, and most importantly it lets you sync up to an actual recording rather than just playing back MIDI.

My biggest complaint about Verizon is that they took all these tax benefit arrangements with many states, in return for the promise to build out "broadband" infrastructure. In those agreements, Verizon said they would do FTTH (fiber-to-the-home, 10Mbps or more), but some years later they conveniently redefined "broadband" as 512kbps DSL, after saving 10s of millions of dollars from each of those states.

That is literally criminal (breach of contract), but nothing ever happened to them for doing so.

Once the infrastructure is built, Verizon (and Comcast, AT&T, TimeWarner, etc) profit margin is ENORMOUS. (more than any oil company makes on gasoline, by %)

If they are going to charge so much, they should at least deliver what they promise, and make an effort to make popular sites (netflix, youtube) as fast as possible.

I don't mind if ISPs attempt to throttle certain criminal sites (piratebay, sarahpalinchannel, etc)