"Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

[pneumaticcannons]

easily carry 20 or so grams of magic powder in a fragmenting case

or a 300ml liquid nitrogen bomb?
[youtube][/youtube]

[Brian the brain]

It's a matter of time.
Pretty soon they will outrun humans/animals and be able to make dicisions.


First they use them to carry supplies, and after a while, when everybody has accepted the use of legged robots they will arm them.


First as sentries, to guard high risk locations and later 2 legged ones will perform covert ops by themselves while they are said to only serve as a squad support device.
Far more accurate, punctual, obedient, agile, physically capable and damage resistant than any human will ever be.

The only difference between Terminators and actual future cyborgs will be where they get their orders from.


Skynet, the evil machine, or the ( human) military...

At least Skynet can;t pretend to mean well and can't excuse itself for a "rogue" unit in case of a mishap.

There is no weapon that man can dream up that he hasn't made unless it is truly impossible.

All the technology is there so I am convinced someone will create a real life version of a Terminator.

Wow...that all sounds pretty negative and serious...
So to end this message with a positive comment..

I wish you all a happy end of the world in a couple of days..

Hahaha!!
( to put that in perspective: I have a calendar in the little girls-room that lasts just one year...I just get a new one each year...)

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

or a 300ml liquid nitrogen bomb?

haha! happened quite often at my previous job.

[youtube][/youtube]

Imagine the line stops briefly, the doser doesn't, puts more nitrogen than it should in the headspace, line starts again, bottle gets capped... BOOOM!

Certainly kept the lazy fecks operating the machines at night awake

Pretty soon they will outrun humans/animals and be able to make dicisions.

First they use them to carry supplies, and after a while, when everybody has accepted the use of legged robots they will arm them.

First as sentries, to guard high risk locations and later 2 legged ones will perform covert ops by themselves while they are said to only serve as a squad support device.
Far more accurate, punctual, obedient, agile, physically capable and damage resistant than any human will ever be.

I think you're spot on Brian.

Robot sentries are already a reality in South Korea.

[youtube][/youtube]

Samsung no less, your move Apple!

[al-xg]

well don't forget that you have to take into consideration efficiencies of all teh parts -> batteries, motors and ESCs

That's why it's as low as 80% but even if it was 70% that's not the issue.

TAM 5 flew for +38 hours on 0.9 L of fuel that's f###### impressive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_of_Butts_Farm
ohh and guess what... I've just found out that they use an alternator to power the electronics on board

But it's a 2m long fixed wing aircraft, 5kg with no payload.

If one looks at rc helicopters the flight times seem to be pretty short regardless of the power source (not entirely sure why though, I must admit) and, of course, there are no relatively small nitro heli's.

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

One for MrC but I'm fascinated by this channel:

[youtube][/youtube]

Worth checking out her other videos too, to be hearing this articulated from a woman's mouth is impressive to say the least.

[POLAND_SPUD]

the general idea I get from this video is -> f### feminists!!...
wait no... let their retarded genes die out

[MrCrowley]

Hey, I'm not a fan of (most) feminists too remember!
Or at least the ones I've encountered online anyway. They just call anyone who disagrees with them a MRA and think what they say is infallible. I seem to agree more with the people who don't see themselves as a feminist (usually because they're too busy to get involved) but touch on the issue every now and then when it relates to what they do or involves them somehow.

When you subscribe only to science blogs, you soon find that everyone knows each other and often references other blogs. Lately, feminism has crept in as a major topic for some blogs I don't subscribe to but it often makes the rounds when something 'controversial' happens. Thus, I end up reading about women's equality from a scientist who openly admits he/she is too busy with other things to be involved in the movement but usually has a stance somewhere in the middle that isn't too absurdly feminist nor too 1950s USA.

That being said, I'm not sure there's a feminist I dislike more than Rebecca Watson

edit:
[youtube][/youtube]

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

the general idea I get from this video is -> f### feminists!!...
wait no... let their retarded genes die out

The worry is that they will take us down with them...

I'm amazed by her videos though, I think I'm in love

*ahem*

I'm not sure there's a feminist I dislike more than Rebecca Watson

She's definitely a poster girl for why some women should be excluded for gender discourse

[youtube][/youtube]

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

Found this:

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-899086

Makes some good points.

Making guns the problem is the lazy solution

I have loved guns since I was 3 years old. I started collecting them, mostly antique guns 20 years ago. The history of the gun tells the story of America, including technology, culture, and the personal drama of early Americans.

I too am having difficulty grasping the horror and rationale for the recent school massacre by a deranged young man. Clearly, his well-intentioned mom should not have created a "gun culture" at home, and given him access to those weapons. I supposed a lot of gun owners are locking up their guns now, that might have just been "in the case" before.

But here is our problem: It isn't simply a gun problem. WE HAVE AN ANGRY YOUNG MAN PROBLEM! We are producing an entire generation of frustrated, media blasted, video game numbed, single-mom raised, dangerous young men, without any kind of code or honor or sense of ethics and personal integrity that they will take into the world.

I would blame TV, media, and a culture that trivializes how important it is to properly FATHER our sons. What about the dads out there? Are we teaching honorable behavior to our sons? Are we training them to be heroes or just money takers?

I have a 13 year old son. He loves his XBox games. Many of them are just practicing slaughtering people. Watching their heads explode while spraying the enemy with full auto fire. Choose any weapon you want... watch their guts blow all over the wall behind them.

Amazing realism. Incredibly realistic backgrounds, sound, and situations. Just like Iraq, or the Old West, or the gang wars of some post-appocalyptic ghetto world.

So much fun. Kill 50, 100 people and then its time for dinner or homework or bed. Just another day. WTF?

I do not like it. I am fairly certain my son will not ever go out and perform mass murder or atrocities. But I am not sure about all of his friends, or all of the other young men across our country.

If we could magically ban all guns... POOF! Gone. What do you think these angry, disenfranchised young men would do? Learn how to knit? Hell no.

They would just get creative. Fire. Knives. Booby traps. Poison. And then those methods of mass killing would all get in the news, and a whole new generation of destruction could visit upon us. A crazy young man could kill a classroom of innocent kids without any guns at all if he was really intent on doing something like that. And, I hate to say it, but one of them probably will someday.

We need to step back and examine how we are raising our sons, what kind of world we have created for them, and what kind of value we have given them.

A typical young man on the frontier was clear that he was needed, that he was a heroic persona, and that guns were there to protect his family, and defend against danger. That is what we need to get back to. Our young men need to feel important, and valued, and learn a code of honor and behavior. And they can / will only learn that from the men, from their fathers. The moms can try, but the young men will not learn it from the women.

America's men need to get out of the office, and become fathers again to their young men.

[MrCrowley]

It isn't simply a gun problem

I sit in the middle with this one. I think a country can have a lot of guns and be safe but I also think that a country with fairly lax gun regulation contributes significantly (along with other things like substandard mental health regulations/care/whatever).

I love guns personally, and if I knew everyone who owned a gun would be at least as responsible as I, then I would have no problem with near-zero gun regulation. I have a feeling someone might relate this argument to cars, knives, or baseball bats but I'll bother writing an argument against that if it's raised.

Dahlberg et al. 2004 - Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study
Kellermann et al. 1998 - Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.

Of course some will point to Switzerland as an example that guns aren't the problem, but I think that's a pretty simplistic comparative analysis. An example of an equally bad, but opposite, statement would be something about a country that has a fair amount of guns per capita and strict gun laws but a low deaths per 100,000 due to firearms rate or some other similar statistic. I think both arguments have their merits, but they are really only the starting point of the analysis and should be investigated much further if anyone wishes to prove the causation from the correlation.

We are producing an entire generation of frustrated, media blasted, video game numbed, single-mom raised, dangerous young men, without any kind of code or honor or sense of ethics and personal integrity that they will take into the world

I'm not really sure what the argument is here, or what the suggested course of action would be. Like my example of the two poor arguments above, I think this argument falls way short of a meaningful inference of how culture may affect violence exhibited by young men. First of all, are we really producing a generation of frustrated young males? Does this frustration relate to extreme violence or just introversion? Do video games have a meaningful effect and if so, is it sensible to regulate them more than they already are? What type of games produce this effect and should it be extended to all forms of media? I would think that video games aren't a cause but rather a characteristic exhibited by people who may have mental issues such as depression. The Columbine shooters were bullied at school for example, it's no surprise that they take refuge in video games like 90% of the teenagers on the internet do. I also suspect this is an argument that's been around throughout the 20th century, similar to the "back in my day, my parents hated rock n roll" kind of thing. If disturbed teenagers want violence, they can find it in plenty of places outside visual media. Animal mutilation and arson springs to mind.

From what I gather, neither the Virginia tech shooter or Columbine shooters had separated parents. If separated parents are a cause for concern, do they cause mental problems or just exacerbate underlying mental issues? Further, how do we prevent parents separating? Do we ban divorces? Is a dysfunctional family with parents who are forced to be together more harmful than a separated family? What if the father or mother is abusive?

People have no code, honour, or ethics these days? I think this person is confusing the characteristics of a sociopath with teenage boys. Is there evidence to back up this claim? If it exists, how do we install code, honour, and ethics back in to the minds of young people? What is actually code or honour in relation to the life of an average person? Sounds like something from the military, not school.

I would blame TV, media, and a culture that trivializes how important it is to properly FATHER our sons. What about the dads out there? Are we teaching honorable behavior to our sons? Are we training them to be heroes or just money takers?

Well that's great, you can blame TV all you want but it doesn't make it true. While media probably does have a small role in mass murders, how do we mitigate this effect? Ban media coverage of murders? In NZ, we have strict rules about the reporting of suicides yet we have the highest rate of teen suicide in the world. Media and culture trivialises how we are supposed to father children? So now the problem is fathers, and not guns or mental health? Who trains their children to be heroes or money makers? Who 'trains' their children at all? Young males capable of things like mass murders probably have at least a minor mental problem (minor as in something like mild depression, that can be treated and overcome with the right help) and I would suspect they are also introverts who keep to themselves; the perfect target of a bully. So perhaps teaching your kids honourable behaviour is a good thing, because it might help prevent your child from bullying a kid who is at risk of some mental problems.

I have a 13 year old son. He loves his XBox games. Many of them are just practicing slaughtering people. Watching their heads explode while spraying the enemy with full auto fire. Choose any weapon you want... watch their guts blow all over the wall behind them.

I see this as an argument against allowing children to shoot firearms or hunt either. Again, I think it's a pretty weak and unsubstantiated argument based on emotion more than rational thought.

If we could magically ban all guns... POOF! Gone. What do you think these angry, disenfranchised young men would do? Learn how to knit? Hell no.

Strawman. This person obviously doesn't follow the arguments of anyone supporting gun regulation. We have good gun regulation in NZ, yet I can still get a semi-auto rifle, powerful hunting rifle, or shotgun without too much trouble. No one's arguing for the U.S. to get rid of guns completely.

They would just get creative. Fire. Knives. Booby traps. Poison

I.e. what kids did 70 years ago instead of having video games. I don't know about the person who wrote this, but have they thought about stopping their kids from playing with poison or booby traps? My teenage years involved a lot of dangerous things but it would've been more dangerous had I no parents to limit what I would do. Furthermore, I doubt this is a contributing factor to the problem. If anything, it's behaviour that may be exhibited by teenagers who already have other underlying problems that contribute towards their potential violence. In the same way that introvertedness isn't a cause of extreme violence exhibited by some teenagers. Mutilating animals probably doesn't cause teenagers to kill but is just behaviour exhibited by teenagers who have that potential due to other factors.

_______________

To be clear, I would favour more gun regulation in the U.S. but I don't really care (as I don't live there) nor do I think any meaningful changes will be made. If Obama gets some regulation law through, it will be filled with holes made by politicians who have bargained with the President in exchange for their vote. This apparently happened with the regulation law from 1994 and it pretty much happens with most unpopular laws. In the end, things only get worse because the pro-gun people point out the sillyness of some of the regulations (regulations may not make sense or be logical due to the bargaining of politicians) and the anti-gun people wont have a law that makes any meaningful difference to the big picture (because the loopholes are easily exploited).

So I'm not here to defend gun regulation or prove that gun regulation is the sensible thing. Obviously, I can't be entirely objective due to my biases, but I do try and point out flawed arguments from both sides. The above article strikes me as a typical reactionary piece written by someone who thinks that, in debates like these, anyone can be a pundit*. I think articles like this come from both sides of the debate, I'm merely pointing out the flaws in this one. In typical fashion, arguments similar to the above will be exchanged tirelessly from both sides before something more news-worthy steals the limelight. Best case scenario, some crappy law will be passed that makes no difference. Worst case scenario, the same debate that took place after Virginia, Aurora, and Sandy Hook will take place after the next shooting; which will happen eventually. What's needed is legitimate research, or arguments substantiated by logical reasoning and empirical evidence, forming the basis of any proposed laws (either to do with mental health or gun control).

I'm sure there are areas of mental health in the U.S. that play a part in shootings like these but I'm not very knowledgeable about that particular area nor have I bothered to do any research in to it. My suspicions, though, are that some of these killers would/should have been caught by the 'system', but not every killer will be. Any proposed laws have to be careful that they don't unfairly catch anyone who otherwise wouldn't have committed any violent act. If we're talking about a small, small group of people unfairly being 'caught' or labelled by the mental health system at the cost of catching a significant number of people who have a high likelihood of harming themselves or others, then it's probably worth it. Who knows what the ratio of false-positives to true-positives should be, but you would hope for something at least like 1 true-positive for every 10 false-positives.

*"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
MrC: I wouldn't limit that 'cult of ignorance' only to the U.S. but, alas, the original quote is not for me to alter.

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

I said some good points

I definitely think video games cannot be blamed, if anything they avoid harm by providing a harmless outlet for aggression. The news media on the other hand:

[youtube][/youtube]

Further, how do we prevent parents separating? Do we ban divorces? Is a dysfunctional family with parents who are forced to be together more harmful than a separated family? What if the father or mother is abusive?

You can stop single motherhood being an easily accessible life choice.

You can stop divorce being an easy route to the aquisition of property for women.

I was rather taken aback by this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20790294

This quote in particular:

Prof Carrier commented: "The question for me is 'why wasn't this discussed 30, 40 years ago.' As far as I know it isn't in the literature."

Asked whether the idea that aggression may have played a key role in shaping the human body might previously have been unpalatable to researchers, Prof Carrier explained: "I think we're more in that situation now than we were in the past.

"I think there is a lot of resistance, maybe more so among academics than people in general - resistance to the idea that, at some level humans are by nature aggressive animals. I actually think that attitude, and the people who have tried to make the case that we don't have a nature - those people have not served us well.

"I think we would be better off if we faced the reality that we have these strong emotions and sometimes they prime us to behave in violent ways. I think if we acknowledged that we'd be better able to prevent violence in future."

Without that aggressive streak, humanity would have died out. To pretend that it isn't hardwired into our brains is to live in denial.

But look at the evil male doctors, attacking cancer aggressively with their penetrating lasers! Do you realise where this sort of thinking would lead?

But hey: http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0768070.html



Everything on this forum is channelling male ingenuity and aggression. In many ways, spudfiles is a bit of a "man cave" where consciously or not we congregate in a male space uninhabited and uninhibited by women.

It's part of us, and it's what we do. Pretending otherwise bottles it up, until the cork pops and tragedies happen.

[jakethebeast]

Funny how two of my hobbys come trogether... I just forged a wall mount for my handheld radio (Yaesu vx-7r) Ancient and modern technology came together

[Zeus]

Good radios aren't they. Myself and a mate have them, they perform really well. But I'm considering a VX-3 for carrying around all the time, VX-7s are pretty compact, but I like compact things, obviously compensating for my height.

And any chance of pics?.


On the current topic, I honestly think there's bugger all we can do to fix it, I recently saw the term "trans-privilege", suggesting that transgender (whatever pronoun they use) are privilged because there's no surgical options for transspecies things and what they call "otherkin", whatever the fuck that is.

So society is rooted, and we can do precisely jack shit. We're a bunch of whining, anally pained, sand in vagina-ed pussies, and we want someone to come in and fix everything. A quote from Tool might be appropriate, but I don't think I can work a CD player after half a bottle of Ouzo, at least I can type anyway.

/pui

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

Well comrades, I'm off to spend the festive season in the Motherland, including a week in Siberia, probably with intermittent internet access, so don't miss me too much

за родину!

[POLAND_SPUD]

you 'll probabably enjoy it but your liver won't