You misspelled diversion.
Printable View
You misspelled diversion.
Well then maybe I don't understand the question.
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.Quote:
But how would YOU go about determining it if you were the investigator, judge or possibly a jury.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Where are you going with this?
It's just fun watching you chase your tail.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
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??Quote:
Originally Posted by boost
Alright, I'll bite....what specific post here are you objecting to?
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by boost
That sounds sick as fuck!Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
When you're singing along with, or quoting, rap music, just replace *that* word with "Fella" and you'll be fine.
oi matey, ya think ong has a loicense to explain himself or wot?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
You need to see the world a bit more. No-one fucking talks like that here.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
oi matey, ya got a fookin' loicense for not recognoizing satoire?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
lol, it's so bad it's good.
It wasn't me.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Is wuf trying to talk like a British farmer who's drunk a little too much coider?
Oi matey, don't let ye constable 'ear ya talkin' loike that without yer loicense!Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/0...nto-fight.html
Watch the video. How useless are tasers?
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I can't really figure out why he's being tased, to be fair. I mean, sure he's a class A dick, but asking why he's being removed is surely not a taserable offence? Seems like these cops were just annoyed by his stubborness. You telling me three man mountains can't drag this guy out?
He's almost definitely on some type of painkiller. He sounds like an asshole, but I don't get what tasing him is supposed to do either.
Last I checked being an asshole is his right as an American.
I guess it applies equally to the cops, too, so moot point.
Carry on, gentlemen.
Is that really all it takes to be taze-proof??? Why even have tazers then?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
The guy being an asshole doesn't really move the meter for me. What's infinitely more amazing, in my opinion, is that this kind of thing doesn't happen fifty times a day. Think about what a fucking achievement it is to get the millions of daily flyers to behave themselves so well that this ass-hole makes news.
Tasing someone for no reason is not "being an asshole", it is assaulting them unlawfully.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
From Physics Monkey thread
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Who would complain about getting an ass slap from a Golden Girl?
Is it 'cause she's dead? I admit, that makes it weird.
Can we get some Betty White, instead?
https://www.northernsun.com/images/i...net-(3759).jpg
Grow a passport. They can survive anything.
LOL US Healthcare
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018...and-a-bandage/Quote:
A woman seeking treatment from a New Jersey hospital in October 2016 for an ear injury was charged $5,751 for her treatment—even though that treatment only consisted of an ice pack and a bandage, according to an ongoing investigation by Vox into hospital emergency room billing.
A lack of transparency has always been a major problem with healthcare costs. Creating that transparency would go a long way toward driving down the cost of healthcare.
I wonder why Obama didn't put it in his plan? Oh yeah, because democrats don't really care about keeping people healthy...they care about raising taxes and declaring victory.
As far as exorbitant costs go.....*yawn*. Stories like this are pretty common. I read one last year about an $800 band-aid. Turned out the follow up to that story revealed that $800 was a fair price for a band-aid. Overhead at hospitals is in-fucking-sane. So if all you want is a band-aid, go to the drug store. If you want to be examined, diagnosed, treated by an expert in band-aid handling, on-demand, at a high-tech facility, then you're gonna have to pay for it.
I was under the impression that Trump already struck down obamacare. Wasn't that one of the #gettingshitdone memes a year ago?
He made it insolventQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Is that a good thing?
Not if the Democrats win in 2018Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I've upgraded my defence at home. I have a crossbow. The law here is fucked up.
I can't have pepper spray. No, that's not allowed. But I can have kitchen knives, baseball bats and fucking crossbows.
four words: strategically placed throwing axes
If all she needed was a bandaid, then she shouldn't have gone to a place with the overhead to treat trauma victims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
I'm in no position to say what the cost should be, but the statement that it should be based solely on the treatment and not at all on the access to facilities and professionals - that's wrong.
ER facilities are prepared to deal with anything (ideally) that comes their way. Whether or not you needed surgery, by going to the ER, you have made use of a surgeon on standby. There are literal tons of equipment in an ER that cost over $100k to own, not counting operating costs.
Again, I'm not at all aware of how pricing should happen, but being charged a facility fee for walking in the door is standard.
I hate anecdotes. You can look at the cost of healthcare in the US compared to other countries with similar quality in healthcare and that tells a lot more. You don't need the ER bill of some dumb skank (conjecture) who hit her head on a coffee table.
You're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
I'll add that nobody "knows" what the cost of anything *should* be. We use the price system of voluntary transactions because it best approximates what costs *should* be. Even so, with stuff like this, the best we can say is the type of thing that impacts prices and in which direction.
Healthcare is one of those areas where policy that impact prices upward in the way that is bad for people has been the norm for a while now.
I guess that's the question. As far as I know, there aren't any that are that similar. Each system has unique problems that emerge from their government policy (and from the culture of the people and other stuff).Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
An appendectomy is an appendectomy, no matter where you get it. The difference is in the US it costs on average $30,000 when in the rest of the world it averages under $3000. You're not getting a 10x better appendectomy for your 30k.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
I'm sure you can find unique areas where one country does better than another, but overall, and for the vast majority of routine treatments, costs in the US are through the roof.
That's mostly because you have a system of health insurance which means everyone gets to pad their pockets along the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
That's one of the issues no one can ever really tell you how much things cost in healthcare and that basically means the consumer has little choice to begin with.
We're not dealing with single variable comparisons.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
idk who 'we' are, but I was making one because I don't like the handwavy philosophical arguments. When I go in for minor surgery and I get a bill for 30k for something that took half an hour, 3 employees, and that literally everywhere else in the world is done for less than 1/10th the price, then it's fair to ask why.I didn't go out to find a particularly bad example, I picked the most routine surgery I could think of and searched for prices.
Additional variables include how long it took to get the operation, the probability of success, the real costs that include taxes, and many others.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
It is possible that in the countries with the lower prices, the prices would be even higher than the US version if turnover times were the same.
Instead of looking at a price and reasoning from that (the "reasoning from a price change" fallacy), it would be better to look at policy and reason from that. Some countries have some better policies than others. Good economics thinking can help describe the directional and magnitude impact of the policies.
Would you say it is possible that the US actually has cheaper healthcare than other countries? Possibly even the cheapest?
In terms of true costs, I would probably say that Singapore has the cheapest system.
What do you think of a single payer (the government) negotiating prices on behalf of the masses (the populace)? Surely buying in bulk HAS to be cheaper than individually?Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
It is cheaper across that dimension.
That dimension isn't exclusive to states. In order for states to use that dimension, other policies come along that counter to an even greater degree.
Not if you define the bulk to be something that isn't actually worth buying for the masses. Especially if as a result more fringe buying bulks up in price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
The main cause of high prices in healthcare is government laws that restrict supply. Other factors also impact price, but are of much lower magnitude than the supply restriction laws.
What government laws are restricting your mum?Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
I'm bored of trolling flattards, and am now trolling roundtards.
I believe that the culture of getting up in arms over "offensive" jokes is a symptom of people having easy lives Joking seems to be one of the main tools to help cope with tragedy. When people have no real tragedy in their lives, maybe they lose that intuition.
Tragedy is relative. Suffering is measured against other people in your society, not on a universal objective scale. That's why poverty and income inequality are considered massive problems in the United States, even though poor households in America have heat, A/C, 3 TV's, X-box, and a leased Acura in the driveway.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
I really don't think the Roseanne situation is anything more than left-wing ideologues exercising power over conservative voices by manipulating the Overton window for their own ends.
Could be this possible phenomenon: social media gives the village idiot the microphone.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
So you agree with the village idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Dog doo, meet wugy shoe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
On a serious note, the village idiots in the context of social media are all the no-name know-nothing no skin-in-the-game fucktards who assblast xir's vuvuzelas whenever triggered.
Suck it England
Yay Croatia
Seriously....how do you lose at your own sport? It's like a Canadian team losing at curling.
Simple... by inventing a sport so awesome, that many cultures from around the world play it obsessively.Quote:
Seriously....how do you lose at your own sport?
No one beats Canada at curling because no one gives a fuck about curling. Well, except Scotland, but they're even less relevant than Canada.
Notice no one can beat USA at American football. Do you know why that is? No one outside America gives a fuck.
That was actually a good tournament for England. Nobody expected the semis, and the manager himself admits this team has a lot of improvement. We need to play like we did in the first half against Croatia for the entire game, then we're potential world beaters.
England invented football? I'm not disputing it, I just really don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
At least a dozen other countries care about ice hockey, and rarely does anyone beat us at that either.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Eggball is a great sport, much more fun to watch than soccer.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
To hear people talk I would have thought England expect to win every tournament, and more generally every sporting event the country is ever involved in. It's a level of arrogance the Americans would envy.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
To the people's credit though, they didn't turn on the team when they eventually lost this time. It's actually been a pretty refreshing show of graciousness compared to the usual whining and name-calling that typically happens when an England team goes out.
There are examples of ball games involving kicking before we turned it into a sport with rules, but yeah what we call football was invented in... the UK for sure, dunno if it's England or Scotland and can't be arsed to research.Quote:
England invented football? I'm not disputing it, I just really don't know.
pfft at least a dozen nations qualify for the knockout stages of the World Cup.Quote:
At least a dozen other countries care about ice hockey, and rarely does anyone beat us at that either.
That's a matter of opinion, and yours is irrelevant.Quote:
Eggball is a great sport, much more fun to watch than soccer.
I dunno who you're listening to, but very few people expected us to do well this year. Yeah England fans are arrogant, but it's not really bourne out of expectation any more, rather just a consequence of dickheads consuming large amounts of alcohol. Sober Englishmen say we're doing well to get to the semis, pissed Englishmen sing It's Coming Home while telling anyone who will listen his opinion about Raheem Sterling.Quote:
To hear people talk I would have thought England expect to win every tournament, and more generally every sporting event the country is ever involved in. It's a level of arrogance the Americans would envy.
People are happy that we're finally playing good football, with a good team spirit. We've been so used to dross, playing an inferior style to our European rivals and constantly getting beaten by them, that people are happy with this World Cup, even though we could've and probably should've got to the final.Quote:
To the people's credit though, they didn't turn on the team when they eventually lost this time. It's actually been a pretty refreshing show of graciousness compared to the usual whining and name-calling that typically happens when an England team goes out.
The downside is that there will be a lot more expectation at the Euros in 2 years, especially given the final is at Wembley. We should be aiming to build on our success this year and win the Euros. So that expectation is back. That's the downside of success, and this year has been a success.
The relevance of my opinion is a matter of opinion, and... you see where this is going.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I think you've missing the huge level of irony that has been on display since the beginning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
When the knockout stages and we had an easy draw that kept getting easier I was as confident as I ever have been (and probably will be) that we'd get to the final but the only team we played who we were big favourites was Sweden, Columbia and Croatia we probably beat like 60% of the time.
I agree that football is boring, unless you care about the team involved most games are dull. That being said good games are great to watch. American football on the other hand is tediously boring for the vast majority of the time but most games tend to have a couple of great moments.
They do seem relatively content this time. I'm mostly remembering that long-distance runner who shat her pants years ago and everyone got on her for being a loser who shat her pants. Not a proud moment for England sports fans. Seemed to me that maybe if less of them bet money on sports they'd appreciate the training and sacrifice their athletes go through and be more supportive.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
That said, there's drunken idiot sports fans in every country. Probably more of them have shat their pants watching sports than the athletes taking part.
Irony? You mean people are bragging to be ironic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
Can't say I followed it this time arounduntil the last couple of games. But when I first moved here there was no internet channels to watch real sports on, so I got into football briefly for a few years. And England always sucked and still before every tourney people were talking like they'd already won.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
Dude....someone gets a concussion on almost every play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
How's that boring?
That's just not true though since around 2006 we have been poor and this team now is getting back to being ok (it's really nothing special) but the mid-late 90s, early 2000s we had lots of very good players unfortunately we had piss poor management and the team always played badly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
One of the main issues was Gerrard/Lampard midfield which clearly didn't work yet no one would not use that as a starting line up. Both great players, dreadful together.
It is by English standards. We're playing the way Glenn Hoddle tried to have us playing, only this time the players are playing this system at club level.Quote:
(it's really nothing special)
Hoddle got mocked for his methods, but it turns out he was actually a decent manager. Still, he's a twat. I like Southgate more, can't see him getting sacked for saying spastics are being punished for sins in their past life.
The problem was that England managers for some reason rated both Gerrard and Lampard above Scholes. Southgate would cream his pants if he had Scholes at his disposal. So would I. I'm a fan of Henderson, but he's a poor man's Scholes.Quote:
One of the main issues was Gerrard/Lampard midfield which clearly didn't work yet no one would not use that as a starting line up. Both great players, dreadful together.
I moved here in 2003. I don't remember the team being very good then either, though can't say I know what makes a good team or anything - just based on them losing early in most tournies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
One of the very first games I watched was Wayne Rooney scoring his first goal as a 16 year old and the announcer saying '"And after that goal, they'll surely be replacing his milk and tea after the game with something a bit stronger!"
Classic.
I'd say last time England were good was in 1998, since then it's been decline, which has only stopped with this World Cup performance.
that's so sad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar4
pfft you had me thinking ragnar was back, but you're commenting on a ten year old post. I'm sure ragnar is still sad, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane_Homer
Is there any interest in me starting a blog thread about me turning $20 into $1000 playing zoom over the next couple of months?
I'd read it and tell you what you're doing wrong even though I'm probably the one who's wrong.
I'm so out of the loop I don't even know what zoom is, but at the very least I can contribute some :shipit: emotes and dust off some old memes like "lol donkaments" and "but how much did you lose?"
It's just fast fold poker. You fold you get dealt into a new hand. It's been around since I remember playing on stars so 2013ish? Other sites have their own names for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
There was something like that on FT. Loved it! It's the bot-reg fly trap. They're all going: holy shit I can play like 1000 hands an hour, meanwhile I'm sitting with some weekenders wondering where all the regs went.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savy
Yeah but finding tables above 10nl is horrid.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Don't underestimate how much of an edge you're giving up by not paying as much attention.
If you're playing stakes above 10nl, then I recommend slow folding your hand, every single time you fold, and watching the hand. This will give you an insight into the opposition that very few, if any, have.
You're welcome.
I never pay attention so no edge to lose. Also I'd be better off making notes on regs after I finish sessions otherwise I'm just killing my hands/hour. Something I don't think the vast majority of the playerpools do enough (I certainly never did).Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
10nlz is probably the first stake that I won't be one of the best players so will start putting some more work in and if the pools have improved I'm most likely a loser at 25nlz.
Holy shit this game is dead. I never filtered for anything above low stakes, but I'm sure they had 100NL rush on FTP, probably 200nl as well. Of all the people who have dirt on Trump, why can't the online poker lobby be one of them. :(
And what Ong said. Even at micros... you can murder at micros if you exploit in a smart way. Usually that just means folding way more post flop to aggression than what would be optimal if your opponents had a brain - so it's not super exciting, but if that's what it takes...
It's not dead just every idiot runs scripts for finding tables and unless something major has changed playing reg tables just becomes really long and I really cba. I also don't like playing very short handed. If I ever start beating higher limits I'll probably put more effort into doing what is the most +EV but I'm just donking about for fun as I'm bored. If I stop being lazy and get a summer job I'll probably go back to not playing.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Hey I just checked, I have 98 freedom dollars on FT, which is apparently now a Stars skin and I have my shitty stars SN instead of my awesome FTP one. You wanna prop bet this shit?
... $96 - 2nl Zoom is rigged!
What you thinking? I'll happily talk hands with you, you going to play on FT of stars?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'm pretty sure it's the same network now, so same games and same player base. I assume you're on EU.
If we're starting with $20, I guess that means if you're down $20 you're out and up $980 you win. I don't think I can handle zoom for that period so how about you play zoom and I play regular? I don't know how I'll track. idk if my 2008 HEM license still works... I'll figure it out.
Maybe I'll play Badugi or 5-draw. Looks like there's a decent number of games.
Let's just bet for brag rights. There's a very low chance I'll stay motivated enough to win this.
I can't decide whether you starting off with more money is a disadvantage for you as a $20 swing playing 10nl is nothing.
The only way I'd be up for this is if the amount of money we bet was large enough that I shouldn't be betting it so I'll probably turn it down. That being said I'll be posting updates so feel free to keep up.
I'd bet the only one on this site more conservative with BRM than me was Daven, and that guy literally had like a 200BI+ roll for whatever stake he played. I'm playing 2nl until at least $100. I don't know much, but I know variance.
bunch of bankroll nits here
if you have a job, amd dont have a coke habit...youre bankrolled indefinitely for 10NL
And that attitude is why I was able to make a living playing this game. Refer to my signature for clarification.
If you have a job why would you only be rolled for 10nl? Even flipping burgers you're earning more than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
I'm playing poker to just kill a bit of time over the summer and see how high I can play in 2018 having done no studying in about 3 years. When (much more if) I hit 1k and I'm enjoying it I may put some effort in and grind a bit more in my spare time when I'm working. It never hurts to be making money in your spare time even if it's only a few dollars an hour.
The last time I played poker properly I had no money and that sucked so much. Now I have money there is just absolutely no stress there which makes playing so much easier. That being said that'll probably slowly come back in as I move up.
Oh quick update on my progress: I played about 30 hands yesterday and as a result I'm back to only 50c in the red. I have no plans of playing today, or any time before the weekend. I'm thinking about pivoting my strategy to hoping you'll go bust.
I never go bust much more likely to b/e at 10nl get bored and withdraw.