|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Milo is easy, people like their opinions confirmed and to see someone dunk on people they don't like. He is the pro wrestling heel of politics. Except he hangs out with Nazis and promotes white supremacist.
|
On October 07 2017 07:32 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion. He would've stayed as just "that one gamergate guy that published the game journalist collusion" if nobody had protested his speeches and got into twitter spats. Or if people didn't insist gay men think this way and behave this way. The combination of the two made him what he is to broader society, or he could've just been another twitter & Breitbart pundit you've never heard of. + Show Spoiler +Also, maybe if people weren't so droll in their responses when he had his bit of flamboyant, provoking fun. Political correctness and all that.
Thinking about it it would probably be better to have Milo as public enemy number one than someone smart like Sam Harris or Shapiro.
At least with Milo any sensible point he's trying to make is
a: hidden behind his idiotic trolling
b: easily torn apart by any high school student who's taken a politics or philosophy lesson.
Unfortunately that didn't stop a shitload of morons hanging on his every word because he hates feminists. Its quite damning of the current political discourse when smart people are ignored in favour of vacuous morons by both sides. Its a way of sidestepping discussion and I think both sides are equally culpable.
|
On October 07 2017 07:21 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 05:51 ticklishmusic wrote:FREMONT, Calif.— Tesla Inc. TSLA 0.44% blamed “production bottlenecks” for having made only a fraction of the promised 1,500 Model 3s, the $35,000 sedan designed to propel the luxury electric-car maker into the mainstream. Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter. + Show Spoiler [rest of article] +While the car’s production began in early July, the advanced assembly line Tesla has boasted of building still wasn’t fully ready as of a few weeks ago, the people said. Tesla’s factory workers had been piecing together parts of the cars in a special area while the company feverishly worked to finish the machinery designed to produce Model 3’s at a rate of thousands a week, the people said.
Automotive experts say it is unusual to be building large parts of a car by hand during production. “That’s not how mass production vehicles are made,” said Dennis Virag, a manufacturing consultant who has worked in the automotive industry for 40 years. “That’s horse-and-carriage type manufacturing. That’s not today’s automotive world.”
In a statement, a Tesla spokeswoman declined to answer questions for this article and said, “For over a decade, the WSJ has relentlessly attacked Tesla with misleading articles that, with few exceptions, push or exceed the boundaries of journalistic integrity. While it is possible that this article could be an exception, that is extremely unlikely.” The Journal disagrees with the company’s categorization of its journalism.
Tesla introduced the Model 3 at an event outside the company’s factory in July, when Chief Executive Elon Musk drove a shiny red Model 3 onstage as hundreds of his employees cheered the first sedans rolling off the production line.
Within minutes of stepping out of the new vehicle, Tesla’s leader warned his engineers and designers the coming months would be challenging. “Frankly, we’re going to be in production hell. Welcome, welcome!” he said to laughter.
Behind the scenes, Tesla had fallen weeks behind in finishing the manufacturing systems to build the vehicle, the people said.
The extent of the problem came to light on Monday when Tesla said it made only 260 Model 3s during the third quarter—averaging three cars a day. The company cited production bottlenecks but didn’t explain much further.
“Although the vast majority of manufacturing subsystems at...our California car plant...are able to operate at high rate, a handful have taken longer to activate than expected,” the company said at the time.
In Mr. Musk’s pursuit to rid the world of combustion engines, Tesla is trying to apply Silicon Valley’s ethos of rapid change to the type of complex manufacturing process that traditional auto makers have spent decades perfecting. Unusual in the U.S. tech industry, where even companies that do make hardware generally outsource their manufacturing, Tesla’s challenge requires integrating an army of factory workers and some 10,000 parts from suppliers around the world.
Tesla’s rollout of the Model X sport-utility vehicle in 2015 also was plagued by quality and design issues that left suppliers scrambling and hourly workers having to rush to meet lofty goals. But the plans for the Model 3 are far larger, meaning the lack of a fully working assembling line so late in production could deal a bigger blow to the company.
Mr. Musk has said Tesla learned from the Model X mistakes. And he has proven doubters wrong before, creating a luxury brand that competes against BMW and Mercedes-Benz for buyers and has demonstrated that fully electric cars can find an enthusiastic following beyond a niche of environmentalists.
Calling his cars a “computer on wheels,” Mr. Musk caught conservative Detroit off guard with Tesla’s ability to quickly change features, such as a semiautonomous drive system, with software updates over the air. The company’s stock has soared about 69% in the past 12 months, at times pushing its market value past General Motors Co.’s .
But building 500,000 vehicles a year—as Mr. Musk had projected Tesla would start doing next year—is a sizable leap for a company that only made 84,000 Model S sedans and Model X SUVs last year. By comparison, General Motors Co., the largest U.S. auto maker by sales, delivered about 10 million vehicles globally last year, or more than 27,000 a day.
To approach what a typical factory in North America churns out, 14-year-old Tesla must build the muscles to roll out a car every minute of the workday and do it so well that the vehicles don’t cause headaches for customers down the road.
Most auto makers celebrate the start of production of a new vehicle to sell—so-called Job 1—after six months or so of running the assembly line to build a few hundred vehicles to work out the bugs, said Doug Betts, senior vice president of global automotive operations at consultancy J.D. Power and a former manufacturing executive for Toyota Motor Corp. , Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and Apple Inc.
“You’re not really improving the final process if you’re not running on it,” Mr. Betts said. “Problems can only be solved once they are found.”
It isn’t uncommon for much larger auto makers to handbuild pre-production versions of a car prior to the sales launch, but those are typically reserved for employees and others willing to test the cars and return them to the company. By the time a car goes on sale, the body shop is typically fully automated.
Inside the Fremont factory, workers said equipment for the so-called body-in-white line for the Model 3, where the car body’s sheet metal is welded together, wasn’t installed until by around September. They guessed at least another month of work remained to calibrate the tools.
One worker who spent time in the Model 3 shop—dubbed by some as Area 51 because of the limited access and secretive nature—described watching young workers in September struggling to move large pieces of steel to weld together instead of using robots as is traditionally the case.
“In place of the robots…you’ve got two associates lining up with a big, old spot welder hanging from the ceiling by a chain, and you’ve got one associate kind of like balancing it and trying to get the welder in position, and you’ve got another welder with his arm guiding it,” this worker recalled seeing. “Sparks go flying.”
In August, Mr. Musk told analysts that the Model 3s coming out of the factory were “not engineering validation units.”
“They’re fully certified, fully DOT-approved, EPA-approved production cars,” Mr. Musk said, referring to the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency. “These are not prototypes in any way. They’re not validation anything. They are full production cars.”
But he also said early versions coming out of Fremont would have issues, which is why the first cars were going to employees and investors who paid for them.
Tesla has said it expects to begin delivering the first cars to nonemployees this quarter. It will have to seriously boost production to meet Mr. Musk’s 5,000-a-week projection. don't worry though, elon is gonna fix puerto rico with batteries and solar power. lmao. "We blame lack of manufacturing on a lack of manufacturing."
tesla decided they were smarter than all the other car people at those lame old-school car companies and pretty much decided they were gonna build cars and build car factories their way. i mean, who needs experience or tried-and-tested manufacturing processes?
they also blamed the WSJ more or less. darn, where's LL when i need him to shit on elon?
|
On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion.
If you go down further the article you read about accomplished, educated people who don't fit the mould of manchildren who are upset women and SJWs infiltrated their vidya games and only communicate through memes. For these people, Milo was the provocateur who represented the opposite political beliefs of what you would expect from a flamboyant gay man, and I guess they found he reflected their situation in left-leaning environments.
I'm sure it was a lot easier to reach those angry gamers though, all you had to do was blame feminism on their favourite hobby, and that's the easiest path to introduce them to the extreme right you see on the Internet now. They aren't exactly interested in debate, they just want to troll, be loud, and have their fun at the expense of others suffering, just like the /b/ of old except now it's gone political.
|
On October 07 2017 07:37 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:32 Danglars wrote:On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion. He would've stayed as just "that one gamergate guy that published the game journalist collusion" if nobody had protested his speeches and got into twitter spats. Or if people didn't insist gay men think this way and behave this way. The combination of the two made him what he is to broader society, or he could've just been another twitter & Breitbart pundit you've never heard of. + Show Spoiler +Also, maybe if people weren't so droll in their responses when he had his bit of flamboyant, provoking fun. Political correctness and all that. Thinking about it it would probably be better to have Milo as public enemy number one than someone smart like Sam Harris or Shapiro. At least with Milo any sensible point he's trying to make is a: hidden behind his idiotic trolling b: easily torn apart by any high school student who's taken a politics or philosophy lesson. Unfortunately that didn't stop a shitload of morons hanging on his every word because he hates feminists. Its quite damning of the current political discourse when smart people are ignored in favour of vacuous morons by both sides. Its a way of sidestepping discussion and I think both sides are equally culpable.
You’re missing the roll humor and ridicule function in broader society. If your opponents, say radical feminists, are acting like morons, it’s the job of the court jester to subject them to ridicule. Point out the folly, crack a couple jokes, show you’re having a fun time doing it. Then you can have a Shapiro too-serious followup of the ten reasons why they’re factually wrong and their desires will lead to ill for society. Chances are you won’t have the final introspective leftist pick up national review and see the Cooke column, but they might see this gay dude on a stage cracking jokes about his black lovers and the size of their cocks. If there’s no free speech, political correctness, or gay orthodoxy problem in society, Milo just fills the role of entertainer and firebrand and makes little impact.
You’re going a little too much into zlefinesque commentary about how it’s a shame the smart people are ignored. I want an abundance of speech both for laughs and for pondering. I don’t think curating discourse so morons aren’t distracted is any way to run society. Let the sacred cows on left and right fall and there will be less need for the entertainers to slaughter them. Right now I see that need, and no it doesn’t fill other roles as liberals and conservatives find their new leaders.
|
On October 07 2017 07:37 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:32 Danglars wrote:On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion. He would've stayed as just "that one gamergate guy that published the game journalist collusion" if nobody had protested his speeches and got into twitter spats. Or if people didn't insist gay men think this way and behave this way. The combination of the two made him what he is to broader society, or he could've just been another twitter & Breitbart pundit you've never heard of. + Show Spoiler +Also, maybe if people weren't so droll in their responses when he had his bit of flamboyant, provoking fun. Political correctness and all that. Thinking about it it would probably be better to have Milo as public enemy number one than someone smart like Sam Harris or Shapiro. At least with Milo any sensible point he's trying to make is a: hidden behind his idiotic trolling b: easily torn apart by any high school student who's taken a politics or philosophy lesson. Unfortunately that didn't stop a shitload of morons hanging on his every word because he hates feminists. Its quite damning of the current political discourse when smart people are ignored in favour of vacuous morons by both sides. Its a way of sidestepping discussion and I think both sides are equally culpable.
I would dispute both sides being equally culpable; I insist on at least a 60/40 split with conservatives/republicans taking the 60% blame; given the amount of anti-intellectualism and anti-expertise coming from that side, plus the other related factors.
|
On October 07 2017 07:51 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:21 Mohdoo wrote:On October 07 2017 05:51 ticklishmusic wrote:FREMONT, Calif.— Tesla Inc. TSLA 0.44% blamed “production bottlenecks” for having made only a fraction of the promised 1,500 Model 3s, the $35,000 sedan designed to propel the luxury electric-car maker into the mainstream. Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter. + Show Spoiler [rest of article] +While the car’s production began in early July, the advanced assembly line Tesla has boasted of building still wasn’t fully ready as of a few weeks ago, the people said. Tesla’s factory workers had been piecing together parts of the cars in a special area while the company feverishly worked to finish the machinery designed to produce Model 3’s at a rate of thousands a week, the people said.
Automotive experts say it is unusual to be building large parts of a car by hand during production. “That’s not how mass production vehicles are made,” said Dennis Virag, a manufacturing consultant who has worked in the automotive industry for 40 years. “That’s horse-and-carriage type manufacturing. That’s not today’s automotive world.”
In a statement, a Tesla spokeswoman declined to answer questions for this article and said, “For over a decade, the WSJ has relentlessly attacked Tesla with misleading articles that, with few exceptions, push or exceed the boundaries of journalistic integrity. While it is possible that this article could be an exception, that is extremely unlikely.” The Journal disagrees with the company’s categorization of its journalism.
Tesla introduced the Model 3 at an event outside the company’s factory in July, when Chief Executive Elon Musk drove a shiny red Model 3 onstage as hundreds of his employees cheered the first sedans rolling off the production line.
Within minutes of stepping out of the new vehicle, Tesla’s leader warned his engineers and designers the coming months would be challenging. “Frankly, we’re going to be in production hell. Welcome, welcome!” he said to laughter.
Behind the scenes, Tesla had fallen weeks behind in finishing the manufacturing systems to build the vehicle, the people said.
The extent of the problem came to light on Monday when Tesla said it made only 260 Model 3s during the third quarter—averaging three cars a day. The company cited production bottlenecks but didn’t explain much further.
“Although the vast majority of manufacturing subsystems at...our California car plant...are able to operate at high rate, a handful have taken longer to activate than expected,” the company said at the time.
In Mr. Musk’s pursuit to rid the world of combustion engines, Tesla is trying to apply Silicon Valley’s ethos of rapid change to the type of complex manufacturing process that traditional auto makers have spent decades perfecting. Unusual in the U.S. tech industry, where even companies that do make hardware generally outsource their manufacturing, Tesla’s challenge requires integrating an army of factory workers and some 10,000 parts from suppliers around the world.
Tesla’s rollout of the Model X sport-utility vehicle in 2015 also was plagued by quality and design issues that left suppliers scrambling and hourly workers having to rush to meet lofty goals. But the plans for the Model 3 are far larger, meaning the lack of a fully working assembling line so late in production could deal a bigger blow to the company.
Mr. Musk has said Tesla learned from the Model X mistakes. And he has proven doubters wrong before, creating a luxury brand that competes against BMW and Mercedes-Benz for buyers and has demonstrated that fully electric cars can find an enthusiastic following beyond a niche of environmentalists.
Calling his cars a “computer on wheels,” Mr. Musk caught conservative Detroit off guard with Tesla’s ability to quickly change features, such as a semiautonomous drive system, with software updates over the air. The company’s stock has soared about 69% in the past 12 months, at times pushing its market value past General Motors Co.’s .
But building 500,000 vehicles a year—as Mr. Musk had projected Tesla would start doing next year—is a sizable leap for a company that only made 84,000 Model S sedans and Model X SUVs last year. By comparison, General Motors Co., the largest U.S. auto maker by sales, delivered about 10 million vehicles globally last year, or more than 27,000 a day.
To approach what a typical factory in North America churns out, 14-year-old Tesla must build the muscles to roll out a car every minute of the workday and do it so well that the vehicles don’t cause headaches for customers down the road.
Most auto makers celebrate the start of production of a new vehicle to sell—so-called Job 1—after six months or so of running the assembly line to build a few hundred vehicles to work out the bugs, said Doug Betts, senior vice president of global automotive operations at consultancy J.D. Power and a former manufacturing executive for Toyota Motor Corp. , Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and Apple Inc.
“You’re not really improving the final process if you’re not running on it,” Mr. Betts said. “Problems can only be solved once they are found.”
It isn’t uncommon for much larger auto makers to handbuild pre-production versions of a car prior to the sales launch, but those are typically reserved for employees and others willing to test the cars and return them to the company. By the time a car goes on sale, the body shop is typically fully automated.
Inside the Fremont factory, workers said equipment for the so-called body-in-white line for the Model 3, where the car body’s sheet metal is welded together, wasn’t installed until by around September. They guessed at least another month of work remained to calibrate the tools.
One worker who spent time in the Model 3 shop—dubbed by some as Area 51 because of the limited access and secretive nature—described watching young workers in September struggling to move large pieces of steel to weld together instead of using robots as is traditionally the case.
“In place of the robots…you’ve got two associates lining up with a big, old spot welder hanging from the ceiling by a chain, and you’ve got one associate kind of like balancing it and trying to get the welder in position, and you’ve got another welder with his arm guiding it,” this worker recalled seeing. “Sparks go flying.”
In August, Mr. Musk told analysts that the Model 3s coming out of the factory were “not engineering validation units.”
“They’re fully certified, fully DOT-approved, EPA-approved production cars,” Mr. Musk said, referring to the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency. “These are not prototypes in any way. They’re not validation anything. They are full production cars.”
But he also said early versions coming out of Fremont would have issues, which is why the first cars were going to employees and investors who paid for them.
Tesla has said it expects to begin delivering the first cars to nonemployees this quarter. It will have to seriously boost production to meet Mr. Musk’s 5,000-a-week projection. don't worry though, elon is gonna fix puerto rico with batteries and solar power. lmao. "We blame lack of manufacturing on a lack of manufacturing." tesla decided they were smarter than all the other car people at those lame old-school car companies and pretty much decided they were gonna build cars and build car factories their way. i mean, who needs experience or tried-and-tested manufacturing processes? they also blamed the WSJ more or less. darn, where's LL when i need him to shit on elon?
And yet his company is worth more than Ford. Markets are retarded sometimes.
|
300% duties.
The U.S. Commerce Department has hit Bombardier with more duties on its CSeries commercial jet in the Canadian company's trade fight with Boeing.
The department said Friday it will impose a 79.82 per cent preliminary anti-dumping duty against the Montreal-based company's 100- to 150-seat civilian aircraft.
The U.S. government move follows last week's decision to slap preliminary countervailing tariffs of nearly 220 per cent on Bombardier, bringing the total duties imposed by the U.S. on the CSeries to almost 300 per cent.
Boeing, the petitioner in the case, has argued that the Canadian government unfairly subsidizes Bombardier in the construction of the CSeries commercial jets. Boeing launched its appeal to the U.S. government in April, several months after Bombardier announced the sale of up to 125 CSeries jets to Delta Airlines.
Bombardier called the new duties an "egregious overreach and misapplication" of trade laws.
The company said it is confident the U.S. International Trade Commission, which must still issue a final decision on the duties, will find that Boeing has suffered no harm in the case.
"The U.S. government should reject Boeing's attempt to tilt the playing field unfairly in its favour and to impose an indirect tax on the flying public through unjustified import tariffs," Bombardier said in a statement.
No collection until delivery
Reuters reported that Delta said it was confident regulators "will conclude that no U.S. manufacturer is at risk" from Bombardier's CSeries.
The duties being imposed by the U.S. won't be collected until Bombardier begins delivering the aircraft to Delta, which is expected in the spring.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1.4343262
|
On October 07 2017 07:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:32 Danglars wrote:On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion. He would've stayed as just "that one gamergate guy that published the game journalist collusion" if nobody had protested his speeches and got into twitter spats. Or if people didn't insist gay men think this way and behave this way. The combination of the two made him what he is to broader society, or he could've just been another twitter & Breitbart pundit you've never heard of. + Show Spoiler +Also, maybe if people weren't so droll in their responses when he had his bit of flamboyant, provoking fun. Political correctness and all that. Thinking about it it would probably be better to have Milo as public enemy number one than someone smart like Sam Harris or Shapiro. At least with Milo any sensible point he's trying to make is a: hidden behind his idiotic trolling b: easily torn apart by any high school student who's taken a politics or philosophy lesson. Unfortunately that didn't stop a shitload of morons hanging on his every word because he hates feminists. Its quite damning of the current political discourse when smart people are ignored in favour of vacuous morons by both sides. Its a way of sidestepping discussion and I think both sides are equally culpable. You’re missing the roll humor and ridicule function in broader society. If your opponents, say radical feminists, are acting like morons, it’s the job of the court jester to subject them to ridicule. Point out the folly, crack a couple jokes, show you’re having a fun time doing it. Then you can have a Shapiro too-serious followup of the ten reasons why they’re factually wrong and their desires will lead to ill for society. Chances are you won’t have the final introspective leftist pick up national review and see the Cooke column, but they might see this gay dude on a stage cracking jokes about his black lovers and the size of their cocks. If there’s no free speech, political correctness, or gay orthodoxy problem in society, Milo just fills the role of entertainer and firebrand and makes little impact. You’re going a little too much into zlefinesque commentary about how it’s a shame the smart people are ignored. I want an abundance of speech both for laughs and for pondering. I don’t think curating discourse so morons aren’t distracted is any way to run society. Let the sacred cows on left and right fall and there will be less need for the entertainers to slaughter them. Right now I see that need, and no it doesn’t fill other roles as liberals and conservatives find their new leaders.
I don't think I'm missing the role of humor at all. I love going to watch a comedian. I like satire and the light it shines on stupidity. What I don't like is when the whole political world is hijacked by jesters. You have one as a president for crying out loud.
I'm not trying to curate discourse. I mean people can listen to whoever they want, but the overall tone of the discourse is a reflection of what people want, and it appears to be based on simple, stupid laughs (which is fine) and having a group of people to hate.
This is ok on its own but it has replaced political discourse in the mainstream media. Its all hate figures and ideological nonsense, pretty much everywhere you turn.
How often does this kind of discourse lead to solutions, or even genuine suggestions about solutions, for any of society's problems?
So the problem i'm pointing out is more about who is getting exposure rather than who is allowed to speak, and it could be that I'm wrong, and its good to have trolls and jokers running the country, but I just can't see it.
Sometimes I think you're right and I'm just a bit of a snob when it comes to this stuff, but again I just can't see how having less competent people in charge is better just because they are stupider, louder and idiots can understand their stupid ideas.
On October 07 2017 07:53 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 07:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:32 Danglars wrote:On October 07 2017 07:24 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 07 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote:
You missed out on the Vox Day, western culture an the 14 words discussion. It was, stunning at the time. And by "at the time", I mean a couple months ago. Needless to say, this thread has felt the effects of Breibart and Milo's efforts. I don't understand what anyone sees in Milo. A good general rule in life is that if someone got famous during gamergate then don't listen to a single word they have to say about anything. All of these people are the kind of individuals whose ideology is so basic and crude that it can be spread like fire using a 7 word meme. The lack of logic, rationality, interesting ideas and ability is far more damning than the moral immaturity in my opinion. He would've stayed as just "that one gamergate guy that published the game journalist collusion" if nobody had protested his speeches and got into twitter spats. Or if people didn't insist gay men think this way and behave this way. The combination of the two made him what he is to broader society, or he could've just been another twitter & Breitbart pundit you've never heard of. + Show Spoiler +Also, maybe if people weren't so droll in their responses when he had his bit of flamboyant, provoking fun. Political correctness and all that. Thinking about it it would probably be better to have Milo as public enemy number one than someone smart like Sam Harris or Shapiro. At least with Milo any sensible point he's trying to make is a: hidden behind his idiotic trolling b: easily torn apart by any high school student who's taken a politics or philosophy lesson. Unfortunately that didn't stop a shitload of morons hanging on his every word because he hates feminists. Its quite damning of the current political discourse when smart people are ignored in favour of vacuous morons by both sides. Its a way of sidestepping discussion and I think both sides are equally culpable. I would dispute both sides being equally culpable; I insist on at least a 60/40 split with conservatives/republicans taking the 60% blame; given the amount of anti-intellectualism and anti-expertise coming from that side, plus the other related factors.
I see it more as two sides of the same coin. The exposure these people get is due to the hysteria bestowed upon them by the other side, and the need to have a hate figure.
|
The main problem with the CNN video is that they screw up an important distinction. He says "allowing the shooter to fire the weapon repeatedly without having to release the trigger."
If that was true they would be illegal. It's the most important aspect of the ban on automatic weapons. The fundamental difference is whether you have to release the trigger between rounds or not.
Additionally, the most important feature of a bump stock is that it has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.
Danglars has a point (you know it hurts my soul to say that), he doesn't know much more than the CNN people, but he's right that not knowing the parts of the gun and how they work makes regulations pretty ineffective.
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive".
|
On October 07 2017 08:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive".
It's a stance that exists at odds with the notion of not wanting to be "confronted" with gays/queers/transgenders, because they just don't want to see it. Either you're bigoted, or you're a hypocrite, pick one. Or maybe re-evaluate your world view a little bit.
|
Argument that people who are bothered by Milo are to sensitive might have flown back in 2015 or 2016. But now, after all the stuff that has come out about him and courting white nationalist, it is straight up moronic. Anyone parroting that line is to stupid to have noticed or simply doesn't give a fuck that Milo is actively trying to grow the white nationalist movement.
|
On October 07 2017 08:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
The main problem with the CNN video is that they screw up an important distinction. He says "allowing the shooter to fire the weapon repeatedly without having to release the trigger."
If that was true they would be illegal. It's the most important aspect of the ban on automatic weapons. The fundamental difference is whether you have to release the trigger between rounds or not.
Additionally, the most important feature of a bump stock is that it has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.
Danglars has a point (you know it hurts my soul to say that), he doesn't know much more than the CNN people, but he's right that not knowing the parts of the gun and how they work makes regulations pretty ineffective.
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive".
Incorrect. The the bump fire modifications are stocks. Only the receiver portion of a gun is legally labeled as a firearm. As such, it doesn't fall under the regulatory domain of the ATF. Even if they wanted to ban the bump fire stocks, they'd need to expand their ability to regulate the other parts of the gun. Good luck with getting that to happen.
|
That buzzfeed article from yesterday pretty clearly outlines that Milo's rise was due to a well oiled machine funded by the mercers, Bannon as the brains, and racists as the idea makers. Leftist reactions were the smallest part of it.
|
On October 07 2017 08:04 CorsairHero wrote:300% duties. Show nested quote +The U.S. Commerce Department has hit Bombardier with more duties on its CSeries commercial jet in the Canadian company's trade fight with Boeing.
The department said Friday it will impose a 79.82 per cent preliminary anti-dumping duty against the Montreal-based company's 100- to 150-seat civilian aircraft.
The U.S. government move follows last week's decision to slap preliminary countervailing tariffs of nearly 220 per cent on Bombardier, bringing the total duties imposed by the U.S. on the CSeries to almost 300 per cent.
Boeing, the petitioner in the case, has argued that the Canadian government unfairly subsidizes Bombardier in the construction of the CSeries commercial jets. Boeing launched its appeal to the U.S. government in April, several months after Bombardier announced the sale of up to 125 CSeries jets to Delta Airlines.
Bombardier called the new duties an "egregious overreach and misapplication" of trade laws.
The company said it is confident the U.S. International Trade Commission, which must still issue a final decision on the duties, will find that Boeing has suffered no harm in the case.
"The U.S. government should reject Boeing's attempt to tilt the playing field unfairly in its favour and to impose an indirect tax on the flying public through unjustified import tariffs," Bombardier said in a statement.
No collection until delivery
Reuters reported that Delta said it was confident regulators "will conclude that no U.S. manufacturer is at risk" from Bombardier's CSeries.
The duties being imposed by the U.S. won't be collected until Bombardier begins delivering the aircraft to Delta, which is expected in the spring. http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1.4343262
How do duties on a jet work btw? (Not being a smartass, actually slightly confused)
A jet constantly flies about, so you can't have duties when it enters the country. So it is probably when an american/american company buys those jets? But in that case, can you just have your daughter company sitting in the cayman islands or whatever else tax haven is currently popular buy those jets and not pay the duties, while having them fly around everywhere anyways?
|
On October 07 2017 08:36 Nevuk wrote:
That buzzfeed article from yesterday pretty clearly outlines that Milo's rise was due to a well oiled machine funded by the mercers, Bannon as the brains, and racists as the idea makers. Leftist reactions were the smallest part of it.
The racist needed Milo to filter their ideas through an editor. Not only to remove the tell tale signs of white supremacists language, but also because they are deeply stupid.
Exhibit A:
It is sort of amazing he even learned to use twitter. And tragic.
|
On October 07 2017 08:35 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 08:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
The main problem with the CNN video is that they screw up an important distinction. He says "allowing the shooter to fire the weapon repeatedly without having to release the trigger."
If that was true they would be illegal. It's the most important aspect of the ban on automatic weapons. The fundamental difference is whether you have to release the trigger between rounds or not.
Additionally, the most important feature of a bump stock is that it has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.
Danglars has a point (you know it hurts my soul to say that), he doesn't know much more than the CNN people, but he's right that not knowing the parts of the gun and how they work makes regulations pretty ineffective.
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive". Incorrect. The the bump fire modifications are stocks. Only the receiver portion of a gun is legally labeled as a firearm. As such, it doesn't fall under the regulatory domain of the ATF. Even if they wanted to ban the bump fire stocks, they'd need to expand their ability to regulate the other parts of the gun. Good luck with getting that to happen.
lol. I know what they are, one of few here who's actually used one. I was pointing out that the CNN video got a critical part wrong by suggesting it was a modification that allowed the user to fire continuously without releasing the trigger. If it did that, it would already be illegal.
Also the NRA basically gave the ATF a pass to "reinterpret" their ability to regulate them so they could probably do that without much resistance (save maybe from companies that basically only sell bump stocks).
|
On October 07 2017 08:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 08:35 Gahlo wrote:On October 07 2017 08:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
The main problem with the CNN video is that they screw up an important distinction. He says "allowing the shooter to fire the weapon repeatedly without having to release the trigger."
If that was true they would be illegal. It's the most important aspect of the ban on automatic weapons. The fundamental difference is whether you have to release the trigger between rounds or not.
Additionally, the most important feature of a bump stock is that it has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.
Danglars has a point (you know it hurts my soul to say that), he doesn't know much more than the CNN people, but he's right that not knowing the parts of the gun and how they work makes regulations pretty ineffective.
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive". Incorrect. The the bump fire modifications are stocks. Only the receiver portion of a gun is legally labeled as a firearm. As such, it doesn't fall under the regulatory domain of the ATF. Even if they wanted to ban the bump fire stocks, they'd need to expand their ability to regulate the other parts of the gun. Good luck with getting that to happen. lol. I know what they are, one of few here who's actually used one. I was pointing out that the CNN video got a critical part wrong by suggesting it was a modification that allowed the user to fire continuously without releasing the trigger. If it did that, it would already be illegal. Also the NRA basically gave the ATF a pass to "reinterpret" their ability to regulate them so they could probably do that without much resistance (save maybe from companies that basically only sell bump stocks).
This is the kind of detail that is only relevant to gun nuts. The rest of the people don't really care about the nitpicky details of how you managed to be smart and have an automatic rifle without it being an automatic rifle by law. They just don't want to be shot at with automatic rifles. (Probably they would prefer to be shot at with no guns at all, but that is apparently impossible in the US)
|
On October 07 2017 08:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2017 08:35 Gahlo wrote:On October 07 2017 08:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
The main problem with the CNN video is that they screw up an important distinction. He says "allowing the shooter to fire the weapon repeatedly without having to release the trigger."
If that was true they would be illegal. It's the most important aspect of the ban on automatic weapons. The fundamental difference is whether you have to release the trigger between rounds or not.
Additionally, the most important feature of a bump stock is that it has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.
Danglars has a point (you know it hurts my soul to say that), he doesn't know much more than the CNN people, but he's right that not knowing the parts of the gun and how they work makes regulations pretty ineffective.
EDIT: I love how someone like Danglars thinks we're supposed to take seriously his whining about people pointing out racist stuff as "racist" and also his "If Milo bothers you, you're too sensitive". Incorrect. The the bump fire modifications are stocks. Only the receiver portion of a gun is legally labeled as a firearm. As such, it doesn't fall under the regulatory domain of the ATF. Even if they wanted to ban the bump fire stocks, they'd need to expand their ability to regulate the other parts of the gun. Good luck with getting that to happen. lol. I know what they are, one of few here who's actually used one. I was pointing out that the CNN video got a critical part wrong by suggesting it was a modification that allowed the user to fire continuously without releasing the trigger. If it did that, it would already be illegal. Also the NRA basically gave the ATF a pass to "reinterpret" their ability to regulate them so they could probably do that without much resistance (save maybe from companies that basically only sell bump stocks).
Congress will need to pass a law to give the ATF the ability to regulate stocks. Right now it is the receiver and that is it.
|
The country's real economy.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. State Department has approved the possible sale of a THAAD anti-missile defense system to Saudi Arabia at an estimated cost of $15 billion, the Pentagon said on Friday, citing Iran among regional threats.
The approval opens the way for Saudi Arabia to purchase 44 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) launchers and 360 missiles, as well as fire control stations and radars.
“This sale furthers U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, and supports the long-term security of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf region in the face of Iranian and other regional threats,” the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation agency said in a statement.
Saudi Arabia and the United States are highly critical of what they consider Iran’s aggressive behavior in the Middle East.
Iran also has one of the biggest ballistic missile programs in the Middle East, viewing it as an essential precautionary defense against the United States and other adversaries, primarily Gulf Arab states and Israel.
THAAD missile systems are deployed to defend against ballistic missile attacks.
Saudi-owned al Arabiya television reported on Thursday that the kingdom had agreed to buy Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems, an announcement that came as Saudi King Salman made during his visit to Russia, the first by a Saudi monarch.
U.S. military sales to Saudi Arabia have come under increased scrutiny over the Saudi-led coalition’s war in Yemen.
Riyadh and its allies have been bombing the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen since the Houthis seized much of the country’s north in 2015. Riyadh says the coalition is fighting terrorists and supporting Yemen’s legitimate government but the office of the U.N. human rights chief has said Saudi-led air strikes cause the majority of civilian casualties.
Lockheed Martin Co (LMT.N) is the prime contractor for the THAAD system, with Raytheon Co (RTN.N) playing an important role in the system’s deployment.
The United States deployed THAAD to South Korea this year to guard against North Korea’s shorter-range missiles. That has drawn fierce criticism from China, which says the system’s powerful radar can probe deep into its territory.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
