search results matching tag: rendering
» channel: weather
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds
Videos (294) | Sift Talk (16) | Blogs (10) | Comments (1000) |
Videos (294) | Sift Talk (16) | Blogs (10) | Comments (1000) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Kubo and the two strings trailer 3
Surprised it's a boy too, but that's a "whatever" moment to me. I'm more bothered at how the models are rendered with a multitude of racist/typical Hollywood "Asian-looking" caricature that's far from reality. Jaundice skin tone? Check. No eye-lid? Check. But it's already an improvement from the pre-90s! Look! No bucktooth!
There's got to be better technology/creativity to render a model that look Asian without looking like a bad caricature.
Puppyhood
I liked this video so up voted. I would however avoid buying Purina puppy chow. Terrible, terrible stuff. Choose a food that does not contain Poultry by-products.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poultry_by-product_meal
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/choosing-dog-food/animal-by-products/
Poultry by-product meal (PBM) is a high-protein commodity used as a major component in some pet foods. It is made from grinding clean, rendered parts of poultry carcasses...Poultry by-product meal quality and composition can change from one batch to another....Chicken by-product costs less than chicken muscle meat and lacks the digestibility of chicken muscle meat.
Stephen Fry on Political Correctness
@enoch, words are important. You should know as you seem to be unable to edit any of them out.
Briefly (because responding to your entire post would put us considerably closer to the entropic death of the universe) yes, I used to respect Frys opinions, now I don't. This is called changing your mind in light of new evidence.
Previously he was eloquent and compassionate, saving his ire for those deserving of it. Here he's just spiteful and grouchy, and his target is abuse victims??
As I said, even he realised how completely wrong he was.
But more importantly, you (and everyone else on this particular"anti-PC" bandwagon) seem to have confused criticism with censorship.
Go back and read my posts. Did I ever call for him to be censored? No, I responded to what he said and called it stupid. That is the essence of free speech.
I don't even fully disagree with him on a lot of his points. I don't really believe in "safe spaces" (I can understand the desire for them, but university is not an appropriate venue for them. I'm not keen on trigger warnings either, but OTOH, I haven't suffered that kind of trauma, so ultimately, I really don't think they do any harm, (although I would argue that a few seconds research should render many of them unnecessary). I would certainly never say that you can't study Titus Andronicus in class, but I don't see the harm in warning a rape survivor of the content either.
Basically, you and he are inventing boogeymen. There are a few instances of stupidity out there, but they are always there.
As I've said before, the "dangers of PC" are vastly outweighed by the dangers of people using the so-called dangers of PC as an excuse for racist, sexist bullshit. This is how it works. They get to say their shit and we get to call them on it.
Real Time with Bill Maher: New Rule – Tax the Churches
Didn't someone once say "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." meaning 'Everyone (including churches and religious people) should pay their taxes.'?
Hmmmmm....now who was that?
nock (Member Profile)
Your video, Life-like Star Wars Battlefront Rendering, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
5 ways you are already a socialist
Hahaha... seriously, what kind of passive aggressive bullshit is that? "Ignoring the theoretical underpinnings of socialism, because I've decided that that's waffling, I say Jesus was a socialist." Next time, maybe just write TL;DR and make a farting noise while rolling your eyes.
You can't dismiss the actual meaning of the word Socialist as 'semantics', if you're talking about whether or not something is socialist. That doesn't help the discussion.
In order to use socialism as you appear to be doing, you would have to first:
- ignore the history of socialism and its political development,
- ignore the entire body of academic work, current and past, on socialism, and
- ignore how the word socialism "IS used now, like it or not" in actual socialist or semi-socialist countries
By doing that you end up at your definition of the word, yes. But you had to take a pretty long detour to get to that point
Marx's quote on religion is pretty straightforward - it can be, as you say, open to interpretation, but it's generally agreed that he didn't say that your Jesus was a stand-up socialist. He is more commonly taken to mean that religion is a false response to the real suffering of the oppressed; religion provides a fiction of suffering and a fiction of redemption/happiness, that will never translate into real change. It makes the oppressed feel like they are bettering their lives, while actually keeping them passive and preventing them from changing anything.
The slightly larger context of the quote is this: "Das religiöse Elend ist in einem der Ausdruck des wirklichen Elendes und in einem die Protestation gegen das wirkliche Elend. Die Religion ist der Seufzer der bedrängten Kreatur, das Gemüth einer herzlosen Welt, wie sie der Geist geistloser Zustände ist. Sie ist das Opium des Volks."
I don't know how to make that more plain, but I can try. Religious suffering is on one hand a response to real suffering (wirkliche Elend, by which one would mean a materialistically determined actual lack of freedom, resources, physical wellbeing, etc), but it is also a false reaction against that real suffering. Real oppression creates suffering to which there could be a real respones, but religion instead substitutes in false suffering and false responses - it tries to tackle real suffering with metaphysical solutions. He goes on to say:
"Die Aufhebung der Religion als des illusorischen Glücks des Volkes ist die Forderung seines wirklichen Glücks."
This, too, seems pretty straightforward to me, but you might see 4 or 5 different things there. Religion teaches the people an illusory form of happiness, which doesn't actually change or even challenge the conditions of suffering, and must therefore be tossed out, for the people to ever achieve real happiness.
A fundamental difference here is that religious goodness is internally, individually, and fundamentally motivated. 'Good' is 'Good', and you as a Christian individual should choose to do Good. A goal of Marxism is to abolish that kind of fundamentalism and replace it with continuous criticism; creating a society that always questions, together, what good is, through the lens of dialectical materialism.
You might recognize this line of thinking* from what modern Europeans call the autonomous left wing, or what Marx and Trotsky called the Permanent Revolution, which Wikipedia helpfully comments on as "Marx outlines his proposal that the proletariat 'make the revolution permanent'. In essence, it consists of the working class maintaining a militant and independent approach to politics both before, during and after the 'struggle' which will bring the 'petty-bourgeois democrats' to power." Which sounds great, except it can also lead to purges, paranoia, and informant societies.
My entire point is that socialism and Christianity are entirely different beasts. One is a rich, layered mythology with an extremely deep academic and political history, but no modern critical or explanatory components.** The other is an academic theory of economics and politics, with all the tools of discourse of modern academia in its toolbelt, and a completely different critical and analytical goal.
TL;DR? Well, Jesus (in a lenient interpretation) taught that we should help the weak. Marx explained that the people should organize to eradicate the conditions that force weakness onto the people. Jesus
taught that greed would keep a man from heaven, Marx explained that religion, nationalism, tribalism and commodity fetishism blinded the people to its common materialist interests. Jesus taught that the meek will be rewarded for their meekness, and while on earth we should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's; Marx explained that meekness as a virtue is a way of preventing actual revolutionary change, and that dividing the world into the spiritual and the materialistic helped keep the people sedate and passive, which plays right into the hands of the Caesars.
*I'm just kidding, I know you don't recognize any of this
**There probably are modern scholars of Christianity who adapt and adopt some of the tools of modern academic discourse; I know too little about academic Christianity.
<Skip if you're not interested in semantics.>
Stating your annoyance about how people use a word and arguing the semantics of the word only contributes towards clogging up the discussion with waffle and painfully detailed point-counterpoint text-walls that everyone loses interest in immediately. I'm going to do the sensible thing and take the meaning of socialism from what the majority of socialists in the world argue for; things like state control being used to counteract the inherent ruthlessness of the free market (i.e. minimum wage, working conditions, rent controls, holidays and working hours), free education, free healthcare (both paid for by contributions from those with means), social housing or money to assist those who cannot work or find themselves out of work... without spending too much time on the close up detail of it, that's roughly what i'll take it to mean and assume you know what i mean (because that's how the word IS used now, like it or not).
<Stop skipping now>
So without getting upset about etymology, I think a reasonable argument could be made for Jesus being a socialist:
- he believed in good will to your neighbour
- he spent time helping and caring for those who were shunned by society and encouraged others to do so too
- he considered greed to be a hindrance to spiritual enlightenment and/or a corrupting influence (easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle and all that)
- he healed and tended the sick for free
- he fed the multitude rather than send them to buy food for themselves
- he argued against worshiping false gods (money for example)
If we believe the stories.
I also think that a good argument could be made for Jesus not being a socialist. You haven't made one, but one could be made.
Marx is open to interpretation, so you're going to have to make your point about his quote clearer. I could take it to mean 4 or 5 different and opposing things.
newtboy (Member Profile)
thanks man.
that rabbit hole goes much further.with the mention of dee and kelly who are responsible for the enochian (or angelic) alphabet,and also enochian magicks.which leads to crowley and the thoth tarot deck.
there can be some correlation between lovecrafts "old ones" and angels.we are not talking the cherub,fairy godmother type angels of childrens stories,but angels who are messengers of god,where gabriel is mentioned as being the size of a solar system an to gaze upon his actual countenance would render the observer mad.
none of that warm and fuzzy from fairy tales but horrors.
i loved studying those esoteric books but they always creeped me out,probably why i love lovecraft.
That is great. I so want one.
*quality weirdness
Why are there dangerous ingredients in vaccines?
Our bodies are best at responding to pathogens that enter our system normally - over mucus membranes, through skin contact, and via ocassional inadvertent ingestion and inhalation.
Directly injecting pathogens (and a whole host of other known toxins) straight into the bloodstream puts their bioavailability at 100%, instantly. These damaging elements have perfect access to the brain, and all other internal organs, giving the body's almost no chance whatsoever to deal with the invading harmful elements. You can expect to see symptoms manifest in minutes, hours, or days - and this is exactly what you do see in vaccine related injuries.
Aluminum, formaldehyde, cyanide, and other elements we do eat, and are harmless when found embeded in their naturally occurring places. Injecting those refined elements (mixed together with all kinds of other poisons) directly into the bloodstream is no where close to eating un-refind foods that have the same elements bonded to other molecules which render them intert or beneficial.
What is the bioavailability of aluminum found in a banana when eaten?
What is the bioavailability of that same quantity of aluminum when the banana is pulverized and injected into the bloodstream?
What is the bioavailability of that same quantity of aluminum when it's refined, and no part of the banana except the aluminum is injected directly into the bloodstream?
Their description of the actual affect of the aluminum in particular is incomplete. Aluminum is a known neural disruptor. If it reaches the brain directly (remember, bioavailability is at 100%) the aluminum will disrupt neurons. This may result in some cases in a neural disruption. Did you know autism is a known neural disruption?
Baby Girl Is :) To Be Seeing Clearly With New 1st Glasses!
I think they approximate it by measuring the shape of the everything by shining light through. The shape of the cornea, lens, and retina and how projections through it render on the retina.
How do they know what prescription to wrap on this little rodent?
Banana Surprise
The render button.
What pushed it out?
Police have no CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY to protect YOU!
I don't know about a mandate, but cops do protect and serve as much as possible.
Cops, every day, get between bad people and good people. Every day they help people, assist those who can't help themselves, take reports, render first aid, raise money for the destitute, listen to the lamentations of those who are aggrieved, put up with gross stupidity, etc etc etc.
every fucking day
Now's here is a much more typical police duty:
http://www.fox19.com/story/29313767/trooper-escorts-lost-elderly-woman-on-scooter
Judge backs charges against cops in Tamir Rice killing
They pulled too close, fired way to fast, even the judge agreed. Yes, some blame falls on the parents, but how many cops are being shot and killed vs citizens at this point?
When does officer safety trump the fact that they are supposed to serve and protect, not shoot at the first option and sort it out later? They fired on Tamir within 2 Seconds of arriving on scene, 2 seconds...
What is even more disturbing about this case is, after shooting him, the police walked around the scene and looked for the weapon while the kid lay dying on the snow. Tamir laid there for 4 minutes bleeding from a torso gunshot wound until a police detective and an FBI agent who happened to be nearby came and rendered aid.
Both cops also had issues.
In a memo to Independence's human resources manager, released by the city in the aftermath of the shooting, Independence deputy police chief Jim Polak wrote that Loehmann had resigned rather than face certain termination due to concerns that he lacked the emotional stability to be a police officer. Polak said that Loehmann was unable to follow "basic functions as instructed". He specifically cited a "dangerous loss of composure" that occurred in a weapons training exercise, during which Loehmann's weapons handling was "dismal" and he became visibly "distracted and weepy" as a result of relationship problems. The memo concluded, "Individually, these events would not be considered major situations, but when taken together they show a pattern of a lack of maturity, indiscretion and not following instructions, I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies." It was subsequently revealed that Cleveland police officials never reviewed Loehmann's personnel file from Independence prior to hiring him.
Garmback, who was driving the police cruiser, has been a police officer in Cleveland since 2008. In 2014, the City of Cleveland paid US$100,000 to settle an excessive force lawsuit brought against him by a local woman; according to her lawsuit, Garmback "rushed and placed her in a chokehold, tackled her to the ground, twisted her wrist and began hitting her body" and "such reckless, wanton and willful excessive use of force proximately caused bodily injury". The woman had called the police to report a car blocking her driveway. The settlement does not appear in Garmback's personnel file.
Amazing pieces of work, and both out there to take care of us. I feel safe, do you?
Is that the "gun" the kid had and was point / waving? A colt 1911. A great hand gun to have, no orange tip? Where is parental control on this?
video of the incident
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/nov/26/cleveland-video-tamir-rice-shooting-police
It seems to me that since the cops pulled up directly on the kid they had not choice except for self protection.
That being said the cops should not have pulled up that close but close enough to have a stand off and have the kid surrender the weapon.
GTA V - Semi Truck Stunt
It's fake? I thought it was just a glitch with the physics and although the tractor and trailer were being rendered separately, the game still thought they were attached and guided the trailer to the tractor when it landed.
What Happens To The Few Good Cops
I expect it has more to do with being regularly placed in dangerous and stressful situations, for which it the only viable long-term solution is the preemptive application of force. That brutalizes people, as in renders them brutal. How could it do anything else? It seems like everything else would follow from that, which in turn seems to follow from horrible policy decisions from there on up.
See, Lantern. This is a sober comment from a reasonable perspective.
It's okay, buddy. We all worry about losing our job sometimes.
It's an interesting insight into your fears & frustrations, I guess..
Do you feel burned out, Lantern?
Do you feel like your mind, body ..spirit.. have been wrecked?
Do you LOVE being a Law Enforcement Officer.. but also you feel very.. resentful or disgruntled or bitter.. about?
Are you upset about..?
- How you're mistrusted/hated as a Police Officer by a seemingly huge group of people in this country?
- How you're portrayed to be "Bullies, Bad guys" or "Thugs" in the news media?
- How ignorant some.. most.. people are about how rough it is being a cop?
Does all that stuff make you want to yell & scream sometimes?
Because that's precisely what's it's like for ALL minorities:
Women, LBGTQQ, Indigenous Peoples, People of Color
Why is that lantern? I wonder why that is? Do you know?
You "get that", right?
Are we on the same page here? Because..
Claimed Police Brutality - What is your take?
My take, there's no way to tell if there was brutality. Most everything happened off camera. However, there's no legal reason for them to be demanding passengers ID themselves unless the officer had reason to believe they had committed a crime (being black doesn't count). That seemed to be the reason for all the action and over reaction.
Any word on what happened in the end? Did the daughter have an asthma attack? Did she get help? Not rendering assistance is one of the charges in Baltimore, isn't it? They do have a duty to provide medical assistance if it's needed, and a death due to neglecting that duty is manslaughter at least.