They were all low quality. Alas, proper english also equals proper english lawyers quashing their intellectual property, except for the translated clips.

I have also found this to be true with subtitled music videos in proper english. If someone puts a massive Spanish subtitle on the video, it survives the english censorship and video removal.

English videos in non english formats survive. They are the fittest and therefore your proper english, following this path, will also die out and morph into INGSOC as long as the abomination of intellectual property law scourages our world.

Then, you (We) are suggesting legitimizing their claim to be autonomous states by accepting that classification to be able to declare war against them. Horrible idea, and against international law.

I call bullshit. That's like saying if an American commits a crime outside of America, or inside it against a foreigner, America just declared war on that country. Absolute bullshit. if Pakistan's government didn't direct the attack, they aren't declaring war. You don't hold a nation accountable for the actions of a few criminals within their borders unless they are backed by that nation. Because they can't stop the monster(s) we made (neither can we) absolutely in no way means they yield their sovereignty...that's asinine. EDIT: your theory would mean the Bundies would be their own country now, sovereign and at war with America, because we were unable to stop them from taking over public land (repeatedly), and didn't prosecute any of them.

Bullshit again. Because they aren't a state, they shouldn't be treated as one, no matter what bullshit they claim. Duh. Maybe they claim to be one, but they don't run away from that claim, it just isn't given credence by accepting it. They mostly are illegal aliens in the countries they now live in.

Afghanistan had good reason to refuse Bush....and you might recall were fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaida already for control of their own country.

Afghanistan was not hosting the terrorists, they 'invaded' or morphed out of non government controlled militias (Al-Qaida started as a retirement unit for the 'freedom fighters' we trained to fight Russia) . The Afghan government has excellent reasons to never invite a super power to cross their borders ever again.....and empires have good reason to avoid doing so. Afghanistan did not start or declare war with us, some invaders and criminals squatting in caves there did.

Exactly, the terrorist organizations aren't the fault or beneficiary of the government's in the countries where they hide or invade, they are the fault of those that support them, oddly missing from the travel ban and our assassination plans. See how that might piss off Afghansans and Pakistani?

It is stop motion, they just "morphed" the transitions. After effects kinda shit.

@Imagoamin

whoa whoa whoa...
did you think i was calling YOU a bed-wetter?
like as in actually using the pronoun "you" to direct my fictional interaction as representing an actual person,in this case YOU?

well,that certainly explains the tone of your reply.

if this is the case then i humbly and sincerely apologize.i was not referring to you at all,but rather a hypothetical and totally fictional interaction between a cry-baby and myself.

which you actually just made my point about humor,and in this case sarcastic humor.an over the top referencing of a certain hyper-sensitive group,in order to make my point about bad ideas,bad philosophy and poor judgment.

the sarcasm should have been obvious.
but alas...it appears it was not,and has been misconstrued as a personal attack.

moving on to your suey park rebuttal.
while the response to her initial call for justice can easily be seen as vile and grotesque (because it is) how does that take away from her inanity? her blatant disregard for nuance and context? or that she simply lacks the basic intelligence to discern satire from actual racist remarks?

it does not.

i think that most people would agree that the vile,disgusting and dehumanizing responses that suey park was subjected to,are to be condemned and yes...ridiculed..for the stupid and trollish behavior they represent.

you do not reply to stupid with even more stupid.

i dont really understand your defense of language,or better put,the imposing of certain words being stricken from the language altogether because some people find them offensive.

language is a fluid animal,and it is ever-changing.words and terms are dropped from the vocabulary or they morph into something altogether new.i have no skin in on the game in that regard.that is how language progresses,and yes,certain words can be offensive in certain contexts.so we should avoid using them,if only to be a decent human being.

my issue is with the FORCED attempts to re-integrate new words.to control what people say and attempt to bring real world consequences upon them,and then turn around and call it "justice".that is not justice! that is censorship!

maybe this will help a bit.
i view words and language as such:words are the means to express thoughts,feelings and imaginings.when we consider the complexity of our thoughts,feelings and imaginings then it becomes quite apparent that words will NEVER suffice to truly,and accurately,express those very human creations.

words will always be inadequate.

so when some people get it in their head that certain words are just too offensive to even utter.this narrows the field of expression that is already inadequate.(i am not talking about BLATANT,and archaic terms that are not only offensive,but are no longer relevant,and in existence still to simply disparage,insult or dehumanize).

now maybe some words no longer serve a valid purpose or are truly offensive and need to be re-examined,but the only way to reach that conclusion as a people..we must actually TALK to one another,and it is in this free market of ideas where bad ideas go to die.

but we have to able to conversate for that to happen.don't you agree?

now i am not going to bother addressing the rest of your comment,because your tone was just a reaction to where you presumed i was coming from.

and you did presume.

you seem like a decent sort,so i will just chalk your final response up to finding my comment offensive and replied in kind.

just know i wasnt heated,nor enraged.
and i certainly wasnt calling you a bed-wetter.
though the extreme end of social justice warriors are STILL humorless cunts.

Edit: I removed a largely unhelpful post I made. I apologise if someone was meaning to reply to it. It would have brought the discussion somewhere I don't really want it to go, and was almost devoid of content despite it's word count.

Instead, having thought a bit more, I think I'm going to try and restate your position to see if I understand it. Watching a few Greenwald interviews helped me to understand it. Please correct me if I'm off base here.

You feel that the current state of the Islamic religion is largely a result of past and current colonialism and interventionism from (mostly) the west. You're saying that we hold a lot of the blame, and that their religion has morphed into it didn't use to be, and has become violent in response to worldly grievances and zeitgeist.

If that is your stance, then we only disagree on the degree that the religion has changed. I think it has stayed more true to its roots than you do. Sounds like a good excuse for me to go on a history reading binge

I must say, I wish it was alien to me as well. It is a disturbing thing to have to fear any interaction with those charged with my safety, but it's the only reasonable reaction when you have had the types of disrespectful interactions I've consistently had with police, no matter how compliant and respectful I was, invariably they are disrespectful, angry, and dishonest.

I grew up believing that cops were there to help citizens and that telling the truth to them is always the best thing to do. Personal and familial experience has dissuaded me of that belief thoroughly.

I'm also a middle-class, middle-aged, straight, white dude, but because I've lived in poor (largely black) areas I have been repeatedly targeted by police for 'sticking out'.

I've seen numerous close family members believe cop's lies, say too much trying to be helpful and/or truthful, and charged with crimes for what they revealed, or in some cases what the cop SAID they revealed. I've personally had cops lie on the stand about what I've said and/or done in their presence, and had them caught by the judge (lucky me) in the lies. Friends and family were not so lucky, and some of them did serious time for things they either did not do or things they were told would be ignored if they just told the nice friendly cops where the fireworks/pot/beer/anything they need to know about/etc. was, then when they tell the truth, officer friendly morphs into angry drill sergeant who charges them with any possible infraction he can think of and off to jail they go charged with the crimes they were promised would be ignored or crimes the officers created by lying.

When you see this behavior repeated time and time again, directed towards quite different people, one must conclude that it's an issue with those in the profession, not any personal issue by the victims. It's quite sad.

No sir.
It is pre-rendered video (or really series of pre-rendered videos) some of them slightly 'tweaked' in semi-real time, most of them not, but not ever by tracking the dancers in real time, which was the whole point of my original post and the follow ups.
Synching the pre-rendered videos with the pre-recorded music is not 'real time rendering' any effects.
An image you 'tweak' on an ipad with your finger(s) to (poorly) SIMULATE real time effects BASED ON MOTION TRACKING is not at all the same thing as real time rendered projections ON DANCERS BASED ON MOTION TRACKING THE DANCERS AND MORPHING THE IMAGE TO THEIR POSITIONS. (apologies for the 'shouting', but you keep missing the point) I'm sorry that's hard for you to understand or admit.

EDIT: For it to be "real time renderings" it would HAVE to track the dancers...which you admit it does not....so I don't get how/why you want to argue a point you already conceded.

As you wrote " As has been mentioned above, you must simply have no idea what socialism is if you think America is even headed in that direction, we're headed the other way buddy" shows your lack of understanding of political systems.

You can 100% government control on 1 side and 0 government power at the other end

At the 100% you would have labels such as Communism
Socialism,Fascism and such. At 0 would be Anarchy


Our government is in the middle but sliding towards more and more government control and morphing into some for of Oligarchy by buying votes via socialist programs promised by the left.
Then the pudendum swing back and the republicans buy votes by promising to "undue" what the left has done.

Either way the people loose because nothing get totally undone. More and more government control ensues.



1 Yes I would like there to be ZERO dollars donations by corporations and people. Since the government owns public airways and grants them via FCC, hence ABC, CBS, NBC etc let these station allot public time for equal debate for ALL parties and persons. TAKE the money out of politics.

2 I do agree what you indicated by the Republicans and did this week was reprehensible. A passing a trillion + bill and and worse the extra "shit" to help banks and such. But to be fair to republicans , Democrats over screw corporations and republicans attempt to unscrew them.

3 school lunches - Government should not be in regulating school lunch- it should be a local thing. Republicans are just undoing Michelle Obama failed school lunch program. Just more finger pointing points for bloggers to use.

4 Federal government controls the laws in DC Its their little kingdom. They can re ban pot all day long.

Generally speaking there are 5 types of government:
Monarchy - rule by one - never truly exits
Oligarchy - ruled by few - most governments today
Democracy- rule by majority - Majority rule is a failed system.
Republic- rule by law - Law limits Government powers
Anarchy - every man for himself- Always short lived due to power vacuum.


You say " America is sliding away from socialism, and into corporatism" Well they are basically neighbors in the political spectrum which would be some form of Oligarchy. Neither necessary serve the people freely.


Both Democrats and Republicans are sliding headlong towards Oligarchy. One party is just trying to get there quicker than the other party.


Both parities have utterly failed its people. There is only 1 party that desires to steer this country back towards a Republic and that is the TEA party. They get stronger and stronger every time their party fail its constituents. Were not all right wing lynching nuts. That's just a myth promoted by left wing media to color you thinking to stay on the Democrat plantation.
Truth of the matter is that four in 10 Tea Party members are either Democrats or Independents. Go to a rally and see for you self.

Understand that claiming to 'know' the 'unknowable' is a definition of insanity. :-)
I can understand your position on ET life, but I disagree it's a certainty, it's merely a statistical NEAR certainty. Just as I must leave that tiny possibility that 'god' exists, you should leave open that tiny possibility that other life does not. We can't know (until we find positive proof, of either, until then it's a question...one can't prove a negative).
Please don't indicate I said any such thing. I do not 'hate people who do', nor have I ever said any such thing. I have said I am disturbed by the ACT of claiming to know the unknowable, and hate the assertion of 'proof' that is never 'proof' (or as you said, BS as fact). It doesn't matter what the topic, to me.
While you may be correct, most don't mention their beliefs daily, that's not what I said...I said when they DO discuss their beliefs, it's usually offered in a 'these are the facts, believe them' manner, morphing to anger if the beliefs are not simply accepted as fact. Again, not always, but more often than not in my experience.
No, proselytizing is not just accepting others' different beliefs, and allowing others to make up their minds. It's saying 'my way is right, anything else is wrong, now do and believe as I do'. I'm guilty of it myself at times, but I'm looking for people to not 'believe' anything but learn how to assess data and figure out reality for themselves (not based on others ideas and beliefs).
I'm pretty much there with you about greed and religious elite.
We differ about science. Beauty, love, love of beauty (art) have been boiled down to chemical processes in the brain scientifically (my godfather was the brain chemist that discovered most of the chemicals in the brain and how they interact). I see no need for anything else, no matter how cool it might be if there were really 'magic' or 'supernatural' things out there to explore and understand.
I try to never take it personally, unless I see a personal attack. I hope you do the same. As I said, I usually try to 'hate' actions and methods, but not the people that use them (with some exceptions for assholes).

EDIT: I think it boils down to people mistaking what they fervently believe for what they 'know', an understandable mistake.

It doesn't have to be cut and dry, black and white.

The argument has largely been morphed by the pro-gun advocates that "Gun control won't stop gun violence".

The flat truth of it is that gun control helps curb gun-related violence. It's not about eliminating it. It's about making reasonable efforts that yield measurable results. The counterargument should NOT be that it's not enough, that's just silly... and downright insulting to the victims.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by oritteropo.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by eric3579. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Amazing-video-morphs-man-through-iconic-images-of-art-cultur

I thought this was such a great idea with so many applications. I want to see it morphed into a phone racing game where you control the phone with voice control to run obstacle courses...what a great drinking game that could be.