NNOO!!! Matrix was a documentary though!! /s But seriously though, if I were Keanu I would steer really wide and far from anything like this because of the semi-cult following he got from the movies. There was borderline problems with people conflicting the metaphors of the movie to actually say it's reality and we are trapped. Like it's a cool hypothesis and explains some things easily like religion, but takes all the fun out of actually researching or discovering something universe shattering like that.
The AI went back in time and changed what was posted. Saw it happen to a guy in NC last week.
if you ever watch a documentary of the great pacific garbage patch it usually shows the most rampant and dangerous items from aquatic life tends to be discarded fishing nets. They all suck though, just nets suck more and get cut off all the time.
Well of course you're not going to see anything negative on a show recorded and produced by the person you're talking about. Historical sites aren't just about the infrastructure/items, it's about honoring the memories and past lives/accomplishments of our ancestors. In regards to the "snake" banning, that site already was embarrassed by a previous recording of ancient aliens, and historical sites have learned not to let organizations and promoters take over and misrepresent the cause and importance of those sites. From my understand they don't even let in people like NPR, they are there as an educational resource and not to be hijacked as proof for a theory they don't represent.
Now if it was an actual scientist working on a scientific research paper? Sure, be outraged. A guy trying to film a show looking for evidence to prove a hypothesis? (not how the scientific method works) Completely delusional to get upset about it.
huh, this is the first time I've ran across this idea on here. I mean, it would be fucking crazy and to pull it off would take a miracle of a life time.... but I think this has merit.
You could file this under Anti-trust/monopoly competition law.
Competition law is the field of law that promotes or seeks to maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. In economics, competition is a scenario where different economic firms[Note 1] are in contention to obtain goods that are limited by varying the elements of the marketing mix: price, product, promotion and place. In classical economic thought, competition causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products.
This is largely how both the DNC and RNC are defined
According to Boris Heersink, "political scientists have traditionally described the parties’ national committees as inconsequential but impartial service providers."
So if you look at both the RNC and DNC as an organization or company that provides a service (which they've argued themselves in court, that they're not a true democratic function), you could consider them a national monopoly on a service provided to political prospects (think ticketmaster-livenation). If you break up the national level to only have individual organizations in states that aren't allowed to unlawfully co-operate with eachother, you would have better chances of people getting their state representatives to actuallly listen to their constituents.
National elections would become like an All-Star Jam or the Olympics basketball team. It would be much the same players but having to form their own services eliminating the "political pipeline" that the DNC/RNC currently has a market on, on a national level. Which, the overwhelming power they have, trickles down into state elections with vast resources and political sway disrupting a democratic process.
You could do all of this in a courtroom, no legislation required to be passed for enforcement. I have faith in each side having enough disgruntled members and judges tired of playing politics that you might get some headway.
I'll just throw mine in to help confirm some of the general consensus coming from the states. Before 9/11, nothing really. A few brief mentions in history class etc, our education is horrible about human history but shoves American history down your throat. During the wars? Absolutely fucking horrific that any country is just allowed to attack an area like that. Every time I heard about some new operation I thought about how my family (if they were in that situation) would be huddle in the corner of a room just hoping to survive the night. Something that would make me want to lash out at anything because of the danger to my family, I never got why ANYONE thought this would "stop the terrorizing" by making more radicalized citizens.
After and currently, I'm completely blown away by the historical and cultural context of Iraq. In school there was never an emphasis on how important that country was to the civilization that we have now. Every documentary or book I read that touches on ancient history includes that area. I think if it was better taught in schools, the general consensus would've been more honorable towards finding a solution that worked for both countries.
I did hear a segment yesterday (I think npr) on the radio talking about the "Gold standard" which was used in the 18th century with a more stable system that I think you'd be interested in.
I can't condone or support your suggestion because I believe inflation has more contributing factors than just minimum wage hikes and population increases (such things as greed, climate change cost impacts, etc). Your statement might be valid if prices were regulated and investigated for the causes of any type of increase.
I also believe companies and owners will NOT provide adequate compensation for the work/profit being performed. A stable regulation system where companies are only able to "fee" out the cost of running the company (and slight profit %) but the rest is given to the worker for his productivity might pan out. But, at the moment, companies can and will only give the lowest amount they can get away with. If you lower that amount they will happily comply (look at how delivery drivers got screwed over with hourly wages being diminished).
You know, it's comments like this that make me laugh and realize how much of a privileged life someone has. Anyone saying, "Oh, it only takes 10 mins to make bread crumbs!", has never actually been required to make all of their food homemade. Let's take a journey and use a generic recipe.
- bake at 275 degrees until dry, about 10-to-15 minutes
ok so maybe 15 mins, preheat oven, getting it all ready, maybe like 30 mins but very relaxed. Lowest priced loaf of bread is $1.39 at a local grocer (it's a horrible brand that's more airpockets and made from the cheapest ingredients possible but it's still counts as bread).
- Add them to the food processor, and process them until coarsely crumbed.
Oh shit, now I need a food processor (cheapest is 40 on amazon and walmart), or I could stand at a blender for 2 hours doing one handfull at a time (if I have a blender). Wait, wasn't this only suppose to take 10 mins?
Ok let's just chop the bread by hand, now we're about an hour into the process after it cools and is chopped. But I wanted shake n' bake, so let's head over to this recipe.
- Mix all ingredients in a large bowl until evenly mixed and the bread crumbs are no longer 'clumpy' from the oil.
Let's see here, Vegetable oil ($2.99), Salt ($0.79), Dried onion flakes ($2.19), Paprika ($1.29), Sugar ($3.19), Garlic powder ($1.29), Ground black Pepper ($2.29), Cayenne ($2.49), Parsley ($2.19), Basil ($2.59), Oregano ($2.49). (all cheapest prices listed from local grocer, nothing premium)
So now we're at over 25$ for the homemade shake and bake ingredients. 65$ if I want a food processor to keep this under an hour. Oh yeah, I hope I have foil, baking sheets, sanitary plastic bags to "shake" it, a long term storage container for the amount I'm making. I'm over $100 as a fresh person starting life to make bread crumbs. 2 hours between prep and time spent getting ingredients.... and I have bread crumbs, guess I'll start actually cooking the meal!
You can make excuses for people that already have some of the required items, but generically you can't make that statement unless they're privileged and have hand me downs or time to bargain shop for cheaper appliances. It all costs in the long run and with homemade you're paying with your time that no one has. The whole point of the shake and bake was a convenience for overworked families trying to continue to participate in society in a "healthy" way. If you can't afford "convenience" as a worker, then you're not getting paid enough.
edit: formatting
ok wait, your goal is income equality and you don't believe too low of a minimum wage is a problem but only maximum wage should be a focus? I'm just trying to understand this ideology. You seem to disfavor the rich in your comments, so you don't believe in wealth hording but you might believe their message of "pull yourself up by the bootstraps?" I can see it, just not understanding what you're getting at completely.
Idk, our crops can't survive extreme heat and drought but certainly there is life in a desert. The ol' Carlin bit of the world will be just fine and all. But, you have to consider the fact that we have always migrated in the past during extreme climate changes and will have to do so in the future if it continues. There is plenty of places like Canada where the climate change will boost some sectors. Same with the fact Antarctica used to be tropical, we'll just huddle around the proverbial fires of our community wherever they need to go to survive.
so no twitter doctors anymore and just sticking with Dr. Pepper now?
I definitely wouldn't suggest that people need to run out with friends and drink copious amounts of alcohol. A night at the bar can be fun, but keeping that as an activity that a friend group commits to repeatedly isn't a healthy setting (for instance alcoholism effects 10% of the population).
That being said, there are a lot of constructive uses with alcoholic beverages such as cooking and really unique flavor profiles. Some of the mixtures that are 90%+ non-alcoholic have interesting tastes that you just can't recreate without the alcohol changing subtle differences in what's present. Definitely respect your choice not to drink though, just throwing this out there as a healthier alternative than binge drinking for those who do want to try.