Randomness thread, part two.

[wufwugy]

The diversity within groups is greater than the diversity between groups.

[BananaStand]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/22...st-argues.html

If you don't eat hamburgers, you're misogynist.

And probably racist too.

[OngBonga]

Overheard in Tesco...

"Daddy, why is my sister called Teresa?"
"Because your Mommy loves Easter, and it's an anagram."
"Ah, I see, thanks Dad."
"No problem Alan."

[OngBonga]

The story of Easter...

Around 2000 years ago, Jesus got nailed to a cross. We call this Good Friday. He got put into a cave with a big stone put in front of it, too big a stone for anyone to move (even though someone must have put it there), and a few days later they had a look in there, and he was gone. Naturally, the most likely explanation is that he came back to life and did some magic to get out, and so we celebrate this wonderful event by getting someone to dress up as a bunny and hide some chocolate eggs for kids to go looking for. Because rabbits, eggs and Jesus are a natural combination.

What a wonderful time of the year. Happy Easter everyone.

[MadMojoMonkey]

You forgot to mention how white he was, and that he now lives at the North Pole.

[BananaStand]

I want someone to explain to me how Christianity, in its entirety, is not a sin.

Moses said "Rule number one...no other gods!!!"

Then like 3000 years later someone said "well....cmon...just one more??"

And somehow that was ok.

[OngBonga]

Yeah no other gods.

But we'll sneak in some pagan fertility celebrations and pretend it's Christian.

[OngBonga]

Can't remember which thread we were talking about media bias in, but check out the BBC right now.

Porton Down (UK chemical lab) have said they are unable to confirm the nerve agent is Russian.

You have to search for the article on the BBC website, it's not on their front page.

[boost]

I want someone to explain to me how Christianity, in its entirety, is not a sin.

Moses said "Rule number one...no other gods!!!"

Then like 3000 years later someone said "well....cmon...just one more??"

And somehow that was ok.

It's called the Holy Trinity. It's really just one god. There, that solves it, right? Oh, and the Virgin Mary isn't a god, and you absolutely should not worship her as one... unless you're Latino, then have at it, but if anyone asks, say she's not a god.

If you've still got questions, ask wuf, he's fond of Christianity and he's really good at hand waving.

[OngBonga]

And she's definitely a virgin. Do not ask Catholics if they can be sure she wasn't just telling Joseph a pack of lies, it offends them for some reason.

[boost]

cant believe the 2nd randomness thread has lasted 10 years

lukie where u at

Shh, I'm not trying to feel old just yet..

[Savy]

Wrestlemania weekend!!!!!

NXT takeover looks like it should be a great show, on now.

[Savy]

Overheard in Tesco...

"Daddy, why is my sister called Teresa?"
"Because your Mommy loves Easter, and it's an anagram."
"Ah, I see, thanks Dad."
"No problem Alan."

Ong, no need to lie pal.

[OngBonga]

I've missed you savy, it's made my day to see you calling me a liar for a poor seasonal joke over a week ago.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Hi, Savy.

How was your WWE weekend?

[Savy]

Hi, Savy.

How was your WWE weekend?

NXT was brilliant, wrestlemania was overall a good watch but pretty poor nearer the end.

I've missed you savy, it's made my day to see you calling me a liar for a poor seasonal joke over a week ago.

I can't see myself posting very much anymore I'm not interested in the vast majority of what gets spoken about on here and it's fairly dead anyway.

[BananaStand]

So a dude comes to your house, takes your cell phone, and tries to abscond with your property.

You use your gun to protect your stuff, and somehow YOU are the criminal??

WTF America???

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/10...ans-ar-15.html

[oskar]

Even if cell phone theft was punishable by death, you'd still have to give the man due process before injecting him over some chinese electronics. Doesn't sound like it was on his property either... and he knew the guy.
If that looks like a lawful killing to you, how do you feel about a pupil who steals a teachers cellphone? Should the teacher be allowed to kill the student? And if not, how is this different?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Even if cell phone theft was punishable by death, you'd still have to give the man due process before injecting him over some chinese electronics. Doesn't sound like it was on his property either... and he knew the guy.
If that looks like a lawful killing to you, how do you feel about a pupil who steals a teachers cellphone? Should the teacher be allowed to kill the student? And if not, how is this different?

Don't feed the troll.

[BananaStand]

Don't feed the troll.

Don't name call. It's toxic to the forum!!!

Spoiler: Show

ass hole

[BananaStand]

Even if cell phone theft was punishable by death, you'd still have to give the man due process before injecting him over some chinese electronics.

No, that's not how self-defense works. It doesn't matter if it's trivial "chinese electronics" or your life savings. It doesn't matter if it's your car, or a box of CocoPuffs. If someone is stealing your shit, you blast 'em.

Doesn't sound like it was on his property either...

So? Imagine you're armed. You're walking down the street and someone tries to take your wallet? Do you just hand it over and say "Well, I would shoot you, but we're not on my property, so here's my money"

and he knew the guy

Again, imagine you're armed. You come home to find your wife getting raped by your neighbor, and he refuses to stop. Are you gonna shoot the guy? Or are you gonna say "Well, I would shoot you, but since I know you I'll just describe you to the police later. Hurry up and finish"

If that looks like a lawful killing to you, how do you feel about a pupil who steals a teachers cellphone? Should the teacher be allowed to kill the student? And if not, how is this different?

I'm not seeing why the distinction of teacher & student is relevant. The only question here is should a property owner be allowed to defend his property from a thief using deadly force. I'm sure the nuances vary from state to state, but overall I would say "yes definitely".

[oskar]

Well at least you're consistent.

[BananaStand]

Well at least you're consistent.

I admit the details in the article are vague. There could be a crime here. But I'm not seeing enough information to determine how this situation differs from a simple case of a property owner lawfully thwarting a thief.

[boost]

Smith had become angry after demanding Lavon return his cellphone and shot at him with a Glock semiautomatic pistol, the complaint said.

It's not clear if Lavon stole the phone or possessed it with Smith's consent and failed to return it in what Smith felt was a timely manner upon request. This distinction does matter. Further, Smith did not open fire while trying to resist being relieved of his property, he shot at Lavon as he fled. Again, this distinction matters, legally and morally.

[Jack Sawyer]

No, that's not how self-defense works. It doesn't matter if it's trivial "chinese electronics" or your life savings. It doesn't matter if it's your car, or a box of CocoPuffs. If someone is stealing your shit, you blast 'em.

Kill a man over 5c. Fucking perfect

So? Imagine you're armed. You're walking down the street and someone tries to take your wallet? Do you just hand it over and say "Well, I would shoot you, but we're not on my property, so here's my money"

This is the argument that conveys the stereotype that with the gun you feel like a man and without it you feel like a boy

Again, imagine you're armed. You come home to find your wife getting raped by your neighbor, and he refuses to stop. Are you gonna shoot the guy? Or are you gonna say "Well, I would shoot you, but since I know you I'll just describe you to the police later. Hurry up and finish"

... and you shoot your wife in the process too, Keyser Sôze style. And, like Keyser Sôze, the kids while you are at it. Even the dog. Shoot everything that moves, burn down the house, then go out for the families of the guilty, even people who happen to just know them

No, that's not how self-defense works. It doesn't matter if it's trivial "chinese electronics" or your life savings. It doesn't matter if it's your car, or a box of CocoPuffs. If someone is stealing your shit, you blast 'em.

Ok, judge, jury and executioner all in one. Anti gun people prefer to outsource those tasks to professionals

[Jack Sawyer]

[Poopadoop]

Something to entertain Ong when he has lots of spliffs.

https://imgur.com/gallery/1uA6031

[OngBonga]

Epilepsy warning please

[Poopadoop]

Apparent motion doesn't induce seizures, flashing lights do.

Have another spliff and try it again.

[oskar]

I'm not seeing why the distinction of teacher & student is relevant. The only question here is should a property owner be allowed to defend his property from a thief using deadly force. I'm sure the nuances vary from state to state, but overall I would say "yes definitely".

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/nation...208437499.html

At least someone's agreeing with you.

[Poopadoop]

Wow.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ords-in-march/

[BananaStand]

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/nation...208437499.html

At least someone's agreeing with you.

That's a tragedy. Not a crime.

[BananaStand]

Wow.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ords-in-march/

But wind turbines are fucking hideous!!!!

[oskar]

That's a tragedy. Not a crime.

Why tragedy? You take someone else's stuff without permission, you have forfeit your right to life. Or are you flip flopping on me here?

[BananaStand]

Why tragedy? You take someone else's stuff without permission, you have forfeit your right to life. Or are you flip flopping on me here?

How is it flip flopping?

The first story was about an actual thief. The second story was about a perceived thief. The law doesn't make a distinction, so neither shooting should be a crime. In the first story, an actual thief was punished. That's justice (the "fairness" of which is debatable, sure). In the second story, someone was killed for being mistakenly perceived as a thief. That's clearly NOT justice. That's a tragedy.

[oskar]

If the father had a right to shoot, then the son was rightfully shot.
He wasn't mistaken for a thief. He stole his brothers truck. He may have planned on returning it, but the intention of returning something doesn't change the fact that he stole it.

[BananaStand]

If the father had a right to shoot, then the son was rightfully shot.

This is not in dispute.

He wasn't mistaken for a thief.

Then why was he shot?

He stole his brothers truck

That's a dubious assertion. He didn't leave the family property. If I came into your office and picked up a pen, signed something, then put the pen back...am I thief?

He may have planned on returning it, but the intention of returning something doesn't change the fact that he stole it.

Disagree, but really it doesn't matter. It's a distinction without a difference. The kid did something that carried the risk of being perceived as a thief, and that risk was realized. Word it however you like. It doesn't change the justifiable-ness of the shooting.

[oskar]

Read the whole thing, then respond after you have collected your thoughts. Sometimes the second part of a sentence contains clues that clarify the first part.
You were the one who is defending the idea that you should be allowed to kill people based on dubious assertions. The shooting is only justifiable if you presume that you are allowed to execute an unidentified person who you perceive to have stolen something that is your, or a blood relatives property, and as such should carry no repercussions.

I don't want to be Mr. Obvious over here, but isn't this a ridiculously easy get out of jail free card? Slip someone your phone, shoot them in the back as they walk away. "Your honor, he had my phone!"
- "DISMISSED!"

[BananaStand]

Read the whole thing, then respond after you have collected your thoughts. Sometimes the second part of a sentence contains clues that clarify the first part.

If you feel I've misunderstood you somehow, just say so, and explain what you think I've misunderstood. Being a dick-hole isn't really helping this discussion.

You were the one who is defending the idea that you should be allowed to kill people based on dubious assertions.

Incorrect. You can kill people based on reasonable and justifiable assertions that your life or property are being threatened.

The shooting is only justifiable if you presume that you are allowed to execute an unidentified person who you perceive to have stolen something that is your, or a blood relatives property, and as such should carry no repercussions.

I didn't say "no repercussions". In the cell phone story, the shooter may be subject to ethical judgement from his peers. If this guy applied for a job from me and I googled his name, I wouldn't hire him. It's also possible that the victim's family could seek remedies in civil court. Being an asshole carries repercussions. Just not the same repercussions as being a criminal.

I don't want to be Mr. Obvious over here,

Yes you do

but isn't this a ridiculously easy get out of jail free card?

No. Applying the law isn't that objective and simple. If it were, lawyers wouldn't exist, juries wouldn't be needed, and judges would make $25K a year.

[wufwugy]

They have a phrase for situations like this: don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Has anyone else noticed that YouTube suggestions have gone all unhelpful lately?

Like, I click one random link, but don't watch the full video, and I'm seeing suggestions in my feed for dozens of videos related to the one which I obviously didn't even enjoy enough to finish the video.

Anyone else notice this?

[oskar]

You can select "not interested" from the pulldown menu, but it seems to take a lot of voting until they no longer suggest a channel.
I think it's all about clickthrough rate and watch time.

[oskar]

They have a phrase for situations like this: don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.

No idea who's pissing and who's the shoe in this analogy.

[oskar]

No. Applying the law isn't that objective and simple. If it were, lawyers wouldn't exist, juries wouldn't be needed, and judges would make $25K a year.

How would you determine whether the cellphone was stolen or the person coerced into taking it, or later placed. Seems like based on the presumption of innocence you'd have to let the person go.

[OngBonga]

Has anyone else noticed that YouTube suggestions have gone all unhelpful lately?

Like, I click one random link, but don't watch the full video, and I'm seeing suggestions in my feed for dozens of videos related to the one which I obviously didn't even enjoy enough to finish the video.

Anyone else notice this?

Nope, pretty much all Ozzy Man, Numberphile, agadmator and reggae in my suggestions.

[BananaStand]

How would you determine whether the cellphone was stolen or the person coerced into taking it, or later placed

That's a questions of fact for investigators, or possibly a jury.

[oskar]

But how would YOU go about determining it if you were the investigator, judge or possibly a jury.

[BananaStand]

But how would YOU go about determining it if you were the investigator, judge or possibly a jury.

The first thing I would do is get myself educated in homicide detective-ery and criminal law. Then I would use those skills to investigate the crime. Then I would make a determination about guilt.

[oskar]

You don't need a criminal law degree for that, you need a precog. A law degree doesn't give you magic powers.

[BananaStand]

I stand by my answer

[oskar]

You misspelled diversion.

[BananaStand]

Well then maybe I don't understand the question.

But how would YOU go about determining it if you were the investigator, judge or possibly a jury.

I'd do all the stuff they do on Law & Order. I'd interrogate the shooter and try to determine if he's truthful. I'd interview witnesses. I'd talk to people that know them. I'd try to find out if there was a different motive than a cell phone theft. I'd look at the forensic evidence. How was he shot. How many times. I'd scrutinize everything the shooter did after the shooting. I'd weigh the facts. And I'd determine an outcome.

[oskar]

Given what evidence could you find the accused guilty?

[BananaStand]

Given what evidence could you find the accused guilty?

That's not how this game works. The burden of proof is on the prosecution sir.

[oskar]

Give me an example of the kind of proof you could give if you were the prosecution.

[BananaStand]

Give me an example of the kind of proof you could give if you were the prosecution.

Perhaps there are witnesses and acquaintances of the parties who can illustrate a non self-defense motive or malice aforethought.

Where are you going with this?

[oskar]

It's just fun watching you chase your tail.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I don't want to be too excited over a small step in a long marathon, but this strikes me as a rather momentous step.

MIT proof-of-concept design for manufacturing graphene in a continuous process.
http://news.mit.edu/2018/manufacturi...membranes-0418

Again, I don't want to get too excited over a small step, but loads of "future tech" ideas are limited by needing stronger, lighter materials, and mass production of graphene has been widely anticipated as our best next step for materials science to bring us that/those material(s).

[wufwugy]

I don't want to be too excited over a small step in a long marathon, but this strikes me as a rather momentous step.

MIT proof-of-concept design for manufacturing graphene in a continuous process.
http://news.mit.edu/2018/manufacturi...membranes-0418

Again, I don't want to get too excited over a small step, but loads of "future tech" ideas are limited by needing stronger, lighter materials, and mass production of graphene has been widely anticipated as our best next step for materials science to bring us that/those material(s).

Do you have insight into what appears to be a difference between tech created by companies and tech created by not-companies? What I'm getting at is this divide: companies keep creating new things that hit the market and people buy, while popular articles keep talking about amazing things happening in research that rarely seem to hit the market.

[boost]

Seriously, whose alt is Banana?

There's like zero chance he's not someone's alt-- I mean, maybe, just maybe he's just a random troll that stumbled upon a small but active forum to have some fun on-- but he's most certainly not a real person.

[BananaStand]

Seriously, whose alt is Banana?

There's like zero chance he's not someone's alt-- I mean, maybe, just maybe he's just a random troll that stumbled upon a small but active forum to have some fun on-- but he's most certainly not a real person.

aren't you guys getting fucking tired of this??

Alright, I'll bite....what specific post here are you objecting to?

[OngBonga]

Shush spoon/wuf/rilla or whoever the fuck you really are. It's been at least a month since we talked about how you're an alt, the topic is clearly up for renewal.

[oskar]

Seriously, whose alt is Banana?

There's like zero chance he's not someone's alt-- I mean, maybe, just maybe he's just a random troll that stumbled upon a small but active forum to have some fun on-- but he's most certainly not a real person.

Spoon would be the obvious candidate. I thought about it, but I don't think spoon could possibly go this long without posting a coontown gif.

skynet shit

That sounds sick as fuck!
If they can make foil, they can make cylinders, right? At the very least. Or fold it into a crane. I don't know much about origami but I heard it's great.

[oskar]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

Ong, explain yourself.

[BananaStand]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

Ong, explain yourself.

Listen up white people.....I started doing this a decade ago and feel I'm way ahead of the curve now.

When you're singing along with, or quoting, rap music, just replace *that* word with "Fella" and you'll be fine.

[wufwugy]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

Ong, explain yourself.

oi matey, ya think ong has a loicense to explain himself or wot?

[Poopadoop]

oi matey, ya think ong has a loicense to explain himself or wot?

You need to see the world a bit more. No-one fucking talks like that here.

[wufwugy]

You need to see the world a bit more. No-one fucking talks like that here.

oi matey, ya got a fookin' loicense for not recognoizing satoire?

[Poopadoop]

lol, it's so bad it's good.

[OngBonga]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

Ong, explain yourself.

It wasn't me.

[OngBonga]

Is wuf trying to talk like a British farmer who's drunk a little too much coider?

[wufwugy]

Is wuf trying to talk like a British Globally Inclusive Peoplekind farmer who's drunk a little too much coider?

Oi matey, don't let ye constable 'ear ya talkin' loike that without yer loicense!

[BananaStand]

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/0...nto-fight.html

Watch the video. How useless are tasers?

[OngBonga]

I think that guy just happens to not do pain. Kind of funny that after a good minute of tasing, he's still casually asking why they're taking him off the plane.

[BananaStand]

Kind of funny that after a good minute of tasing, he's still casually asking why they're taking him off the plane.

Funniest part to me is watching the cop tase the guy for a minute, see that it's not working, and instead of dropping an elbow into his skull and dragging him off the plane, they just try tasing him in a different part of his body.