Forced Ranting
freexcitizen:

codenamedeadpool:

Here’s that Kershaw Emerson collabo CQC-7K I got a couple weeks back. I’ve been carrying it pretty regularly and have to say I’m impressed. This feels more like $100 knife than it does a $38 dollar knife. Fit and finish are pretty nice, blade is well-centered, and the Emerson wave functions beautifully. Best budget folder I’ve ever bought.

Yo that’s way bigger then mine, wish it wasn’t tanto

Emerson always makes really nice stuff, and the CQC7 is a classic.

freexcitizen:

codenamedeadpool:

Here’s that Kershaw Emerson collabo CQC-7K I got a couple weeks back. I’ve been carrying it pretty regularly and have to say I’m impressed. This feels more like $100 knife than it does a $38 dollar knife. Fit and finish are pretty nice, blade is well-centered, and the Emerson wave functions beautifully. Best budget folder I’ve ever bought.

Yo that’s way bigger then mine, wish it wasn’t tanto

Emerson always makes really nice stuff, and the CQC7 is a classic.

i-am-dallas:

forcedranting:

i-am-dallas:

nojusticenopizza:

governmentname:

priceofliberty:

How bad is California’s drought? Before and After

i cant believe that people are willing to tolerate it

government ass kissers are always willing to tolerate the bullshit going on around them…

1) How is this the fault of government?
2) What should the citizens do about it?
3) If Bill Maher didn’t spend so much time making fun of other southern states in a drought last year, maybe he wouldn’t have jinxed all of you.

Despite large growth in demand for water, the state has not built any significant additional water storage infrastructure in several decades.

This is not the fault of government. That region is already desolate and devoid of moisture. From the beginning, southern California and parts of Nevada had to truck in water to support the migration. After all, Death Valley (the hottest place on earth) is inside the state of California. That place never had any water. So building “significant water storage infrastructure” may not be much help. The reason it’s so dry right now is because of environment, not because of the lack of government performance.

Additionally, they’ve been actively removing dams. On the other hand, it’s not entirely the state’s fault: the voters at every opportunity have opposed new dam construction.

Because of cost required, and the lack of resources worthy enough to make that investment, is poor.

Yes, this is an abnormal drought, but the emergency is entirely man-made.

Depends on how you define drought. Drought is measured in many ways. Generally it refers to the amount of moisture in the area, but how they arrive at that number depends on many variables. They could be getting a lot of rain, but because of the lack of fresh water sources, it may show severe drought, or vice-versa. Either way, the government is not the fault of the lack of existing moisture in the area, nor the lack of rain fall, nor the lack of fresh water sources, etc.

It’s like moving to a house sitting on the side of a volcano and complaining every few years because it’s smoggy, and then suggesting that “if the government just invested in fresh air supply then blah blah blah”. I just don’t buy it. I’m not, however, suggesting that government can’t help minimize the impact, but to suggest it’s the fault of government is just wrong.

And why is Death Valley so dry? Oh, right, because it is on the east side of the Sierra Nevada (which also happens to be in California).

Quick science lesson: as air rises against a mountain, it cools, and as it descends on the other side, it heats up again, otherwise known as adiabatic heating. This creates what is known as a “rain shadow" behind large mountain ranges - like the Sierra Nevada.

Given that California has a Mediterranean climate, most of its rain comes in the winter. Large amounts of precipitation fall on the western sides of the mountain range in the form of snow. This is the source of all of the rivers in California. 

In normal years, there is plenty of water in California. The trick is holding on to it long enough to use it. That’s where dams come in. It’s true that in the past, dams have wreaked quite a bit of damage to wildlife habitat. However, in drought years like these, they also can preserve minimum water flows, preventing large fish kills.

But in order to do so, California needs multi-year water reserves.

i-am-dallas:

nojusticenopizza:

governmentname:

priceofliberty:

How bad is California’s drought? Before and After

i cant believe that people are willing to tolerate it

government ass kissers are always willing to tolerate the bullshit going on around them…

1) How is this the fault of government?
2) What should the citizens do about it?
3) If Bill Maher didn’t spend so much time making fun of other southern states in a drought last year, maybe he wouldn’t have jinxed all of you.

Despite large growth in demand for water, the state has not built any significant additional water storage infrastructure in several decades. Additionally, they’ve been actively removing dams. On the other hand, it’s not entirely the state’s fault: the voters at every opportunity have opposed new dam construction.

Yes, this is an abnormal drought, but the emergency is entirely man-made.

i-am-dallas:

runningrepublican:

I feel like that 16% is tumblr. 

It is indeed common to coin a term with the adjective “free” prefixed, in order to take advantage of people’s unreflective infatuation for freedom. Thus in addition to “free market” we have “free love” and “free thinking.” Related to this is the word “choice,” used most notably by proponents of legal abortion, but also in the so-called “school choice” movement. Of course, neither freedom nor choice are always good things. If we had freedom to drive in any lane or direction we wanted to on a highway we would indeed have more freedom of a sort, but a freedom that would quickly nullify the possibility of driving on highways. But people generally do not stop to think about this, and simply respond favorably to anything having the adjective free attached to it.

So the second half of your argument boils down to “if not for the government, people would drive on the wrong side of the roads”? Come on now, you can do better than that.

i-am-dallas:

runningrepublican:

I feel like that 16% is tumblr. 

It is indeed common to coin a term with the adjective “free” prefixed, in order to take advantage of people’s unreflective infatuation for freedom. Thus in addition to “free market” we have “free love” and “free thinking.” Related to this is the word “choice,” used most notably by proponents of legal abortion, but also in the so-called “school choice” movement. Of course, neither freedom nor choice are always good things. If we had freedom to drive in any lane or direction we wanted to on a highway we would indeed have more freedom of a sort, but a freedom that would quickly nullify the possibility of driving on highways. But people generally do not stop to think about this, and simply respond favorably to anything having the adjective free attached to it.

So the second half of your argument boils down to “if not for the government, people would drive on the wrong side of the roads”?

Come on now, you can do better than that.

butmuhgains:

cadof:

You can’t have it both ways. It either exists or doesn’t. My guess is prior to January 20, 2009 Clive Bundy believed in the existence of the federal government.
- MK

This is the most retarded fucking thing I’ve read regarding the Bundy Ranch incident

I’m not surprised at all that someone stupid enough to make that graphic is also unable to pay their webhosting bill.

butmuhgains:

cadof:

You can’t have it both ways. It either exists or doesn’t. My guess is prior to January 20, 2009 Clive Bundy believed in the existence of the federal government.

- MK

This is the most retarded fucking thing I’ve read regarding the Bundy Ranch incident

I’m not surprised at all that someone stupid enough to make that graphic is also unable to pay their webhosting bill.

(source)

communismkills:

forcedranting:

Soylent 1.0 Update

tl;dr

- We recently put a brief hold on shipping, which has since resumed

- Early recipients of Soylent 1.0 indicated they were quite happy with the taste, texture, and ease of Soylent, but some experienced side effects including flatulence and headaches

- We took some time to work…

tl;dr

The folks behind Soylent just admitted that they’ve been lying to us. They published shipping dates back in May claiming that new orders would take about 10 weeks. Then, 10 weeks later, they came back and said “oops, we had a problem (at first it was a packaging problem — now it’s a “flatulence” problem) — and it’s going to take another 10-12 weeks to ship your order”.

That’s right — they’re claiming to have lost two and a half months of time, by pausing shipping for a week. I don’t know whether to be more upset at the delay, or that they’re insulting our intelligence with lame excuses like these.

So, to recap, after lying to supporters for nearly a year before finally delivering something to them, now they’re lying to new customers. Far from being a success story of crowdfunding, this is turning into a cautionary tale.

My advice would be to stay the hell away from these charlatans until they have a track-record of actually doing the things they claim they’re going to do. By no means should you give them any money at all.

Have there ever been any products delivered?

A friend of mine who signed up to the original kickstarter more than a year ago finally got his order a few weeks ago, so it’s not complete vaporware (anymore….), but don’t give them money that you might want to use for anything else for the next year or so, since that’s the best proven delivery time they’ve achieved so far.

tl;dr

- We recently put a brief hold on shipping, which has since resumed

- Early recipients of Soylent 1.0 indicated they were quite happy with the taste, texture, and ease of Soylent, but some experienced side effects including flatulence and headaches

- We took some time to work…

tl;dr

The folks behind Soylent just admitted that they’ve been lying to us. They published shipping dates back in May claiming that new orders would take about 10 weeks. Then, 10 weeks later, they came back and said “oops, we had a problem (at first it was a packaging problem — now it’s a “flatulence” problem) — and it’s going to take another 10-12 weeks to ship your order”.

That’s right — they’re claiming to have lost two and a half months of time, by pausing shipping for a week. I don’t know whether to be more upset at the delay, or that they’re insulting our intelligence with lame excuses like these.

So, to recap, after lying to supporters for nearly a year before finally delivering something to them, now they’re lying to new customers. Far from being a success story of crowdfunding, this is turning into a cautionary tale.

My advice would be to stay the hell away from these charlatans until they have a track-record of actually doing the things they claim they’re going to do. By no means should you give them any money at all.

How dumb do you have to be to throw rocks at soldiers carrying rifles?

communismkills:

forcedranting:

communismkills:

I’m confused here. Walter Block has always been in to the evictionism argument, even calling babies “parasites”, and yet I’m reading something he wrote that is a very, very, very pro-life position. He took a pro-life position simply to defend Ron Paul. That’s… not intellectually honest.

Here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/evictionism-the-only-true-libertarian-position-on-abortion/

vs.

Number 3: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2011/12/walter-e-block/response-to-a-jewish-opponent-of-ron-paul/

huh?

On a more serious note, this is part and parcel of what it means to be pro life. It is entirely legitimate for a libertarian to disagree with Dr. Paul on this issue. The libertarian community, as in the case of the population at large, is greatly divided on this issue. Thus, to make this into some sort of litmus test for libertarians is improper.

As it happens, I disagree with Dr. Paul on this issue. I am neither pro life nor pro choice. I adopt a third alternative, the evictionist position.

seems fairly consistent to me.

Read here:

"Yes, what "arrogance" on the part of an Ob-Gyn who has delivered some 4,000 babies. Who is Dr. Paul to define life as beginning at conception? Why, everyone knows, they just know, that life really begins at birth. Therefore, such horrors as partial birth abortion are entirely justified. I mean, the effrontery of the man!"

That does not read like the argument of someone who supports evictionism (which is abortion, even if he won’t admit it).

I didn’t read that as a serious argument. I read it as mocking his opponent.

communismkills:

I’m confused here. Walter Block has always been in to the evictionism argument, even calling babies “parasites”, and yet I’m reading something he wrote that is a very, very, very pro-life position. He took a pro-life position simply to defend Ron Paul. That’s… not intellectually honest.

Here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/evictionism-the-only-true-libertarian-position-on-abortion/

vs.

Number 3: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2011/12/walter-e-block/response-to-a-jewish-opponent-of-ron-paul/

huh?

On a more serious note, this is part and parcel of what it means to be pro life. It is entirely legitimate for a libertarian to disagree with Dr. Paul on this issue. The libertarian community, as in the case of the population at large, is greatly divided on this issue. Thus, to make this into some sort of litmus test for libertarians is improper.

As it happens, I disagree with Dr. Paul on this issue. I am neither pro life nor pro choice. I adopt a third alternative, the evictionist position.

seems fairly consistent to me.

An aggressive war is the great crime against everything good in the world. A defensive war, which must necessarily turn to aggressive at the earliest moment, is the necessary great counter-crime. But never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime. Ask the infantry and the dead.
Ernest Hemingway