This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Topics - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 434445 4647 ... 67
1321
« on: December 21, 2014, 12:32:16 PM »
wat do
1322
« on: December 21, 2014, 12:05:35 PM »
Are you willing to click it, Mr P?
1323
« on: December 20, 2014, 03:52:25 PM »
I. Can't. Be. Fucking. Bothered.
Fuck my fucking job.
/minirant
1324
« on: December 20, 2014, 11:21:00 AM »
Yes, my secret santa gift went down really well actually.
Thanks for fucking asking.
Cunts.
1325
« on: December 20, 2014, 11:01:39 AM »
Proof: Oprah Winfrey in this video.
1326
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:49:35 AM »
Our glorious leader Emperor Farage will guide us to a new age of decency!
1327
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:32:36 AM »
1328
« on: December 20, 2014, 04:40:07 AM »
I know using the term "criminal culture" is bound to rupture some anuses something almighty, so let me clarify.
This criminal culture among black people is, obviously, linked to gang culture among relatively destitute and impoverished black communities, which are usually hit hard by unemployment and poor education.
So my question is - how much does rap music exacerbate this problem?
1329
« on: December 20, 2014, 03:43:56 AM »
Can't hide any more.
1330
« on: December 19, 2014, 04:36:53 PM »
Jokes aside, it's quite fucking weird. Although, not wholly unexpected.
1331
« on: December 19, 2014, 04:26:39 PM »
Fuck me.
1332
« on: December 19, 2014, 04:01:03 PM »
1333
« on: December 19, 2014, 03:31:21 PM »
>mfw realpolitik
1334
« on: December 19, 2014, 03:18:04 PM »
She'll overtake Victoria, who reigned for 63 years and 216 days. Elizabeth II has currently ruled for 62 years and about 300 days.
She's already the oldest living monarch we've had, as Victoria died 7 years younger than the Queen - who's currently 88. So there's a good chance we'll witness the moment Elizabeth II becomes the longest reigning monarch of the United Kingdom.
God save the Queen.
1335
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:16:04 PM »
1336
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:08:14 PM »
Definitely power.
1337
« on: December 19, 2014, 12:36:01 PM »
An Ode to Mince Pies
I’m writing this poem to mince pies, Who always increase my dick size. I love you more than life itself, And I long to see you, on my cupboard shelf.
I adore your mincey meat, You make me feel like a bitch in heat. And when you remove your pastry, I feel myself growing racy.
I love to take a bite and peer inside, I’ll lube you up and in I’ll slide. I’ll keep on going till I’m ready to blow, Then I'll release my creamy flow!
And so, when we climb into my bed, And you offer me mincemeat-y head, I’ll remember how beautiful you were, When I bought you from the restaurateur.
And after, when you light a cigarette, And I clean off my fleshy bayonet, I’ll put on the microwave for minutes ten, And prepare to eat you all over again!
I’ll place you in a bowl, top you with sugar and cream, And we’ll both indulge in our wildest dream! We’ll finally be together; two parts of a whole, And I’ll always have you, Mince Pie, in my soul.
1338
« on: December 19, 2014, 12:34:47 PM »
Lock this. Or delete it. Whatever
1339
« on: December 19, 2014, 12:03:53 PM »
Labels, especially political ones, are usually criticised for being too restrictive, and sorting people into a box. While I agree with this, I still like labels for their sheer utility. Therefore, I've tried to add a bit of nuance by giving you a broad compendium of political labels and then asking you to sort them into three categories. Sort the labels into these categories: - Happily Identify With - Identify With OccasionallyIf you don't know the definition of one of them - or simply don't care about its implications - then just ignore it or ask me. The last category, of course, needn't be included. A note about the lexicon - if a label is comprised of two words, then the first usually denotes attitude while the second denotes content. For instance, a conservative libertarian would take a very conservative approach to libertarianism. While a libertarian conservative would use libertarianism as a way of reaching conservatism. Here are the words: Right Wing 1. Conservative 2. Conservative Liberal 3. Classical Liberal 4. Neoliberal 5. Fiscal Conservative 6. Theoconservative 7. Cultural Conservative 8. Traditionalist Conservative 9. Social Conservative 10. Conservative Libertarian 11. Libertarian Conservative 12. Libertarian 13. Monarchist 15. Reactionary 16. Zionist 17. Minarchist 18. Objectivist 19. Voluntarist 20. Republican 21. Interventionist 22. Monetarist Left Wing 23. Liberal 24. Social Liberal 25. Mordern Liberal 26. Social Democrat 27. Social Libertarian 28. Collectivist Anarchist 29. Philosophical Anarchist 30. Libertarian Socialist 31. Marxian Socialist 32. Anarcho-Communist 33. Communist 34. Marxist 35. Trotskyist 36. Stalinist 37. Feminism 38. Keynesian 39. Non-interventionist 40. Protectionist 41. Democrat (Party) 42. Democrat (somebody who supports democracy) Right, then. I'll sort them into my own categories: Happily Identify With:Spoiler 1. Conservative 4. Neoliberal 5. Fiscal Conservative 7. Cultural Conservative 8. Traditionalist Conservative 10. Conservative Libertarian 13. Monarchist 16. Zionist 21. Interventionist 22. Monetarist Occasionally Identify With:Spoiler 9. Social Conservative 15. Reactionary 20. Republican 27. Social Libertarian 29. Philosophical Anarchist 41. Democrat (Party) Have a look through other people's; see if anything surprises you.
1341
« on: December 18, 2014, 12:57:47 PM »
It's almost hard to watch.
1342
« on: December 18, 2014, 12:36:40 PM »
1343
« on: December 18, 2014, 12:19:53 PM »
1344
« on: December 18, 2014, 02:13:16 AM »
Fuck you.
I got told off yesterday at college because I snapped and started shouting at my friend for being a cock-mongling fuck-up. And I'm fucking ill either from my mother or another friend of mine, so that fucking sucks.
And I can't take a day off either because today we're doing secret santa in my philosophy class and tomorrow is the last day - when we'll be doing secret santa among my friends.
Plus, we're doing absolutely fuck all for these past few days, and I honestly have no fucking lessons where I'm not going to learn anything despite knowing Jack fucking Balls about Orthodox iconography, Arthur Schlesinger's hypothesis of the imperial presidency or what question to pick for a second piece of coursework on Oliver Cromwell.
Plus, the present I have for my friend in this secret santa fucking thing hasn't arrived yet, so somebody's going to find themselves with their testicles between a nutcracker if it doesn't arrive today.
1345
« on: December 17, 2014, 07:48:40 PM »
Daily Mail.It looks like something from a science fiction film, with giant wraparound screens and artificial intelligence software constantly monitoring things.
However, Rolls Royce believes that this is the future of shipping.
It says the 'future bridge' will be in use by 2025 in ships across the world - and has already fitted a prototype to one ship.
Together with VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Rolls-Royce today unveiled its latest vision of Ship Intelligence - a futuristic ship's bridge concept which could become reality by 2025.
Rolls-Royce has worked together with VTT's researchers and Aalto University to develop the new bridge, known as the Future Operator Experience Concept or 'oX'.
It offers the crew smart workstations, which automatically recognise individuals when they walk into the bridge, and adjust to their own preferences.
The windows of the bridge serve as augmented reality displays of the vessel's surroundings, including visualisation of potential hazards that would otherwise be invisible to the human eye.
The system can, for example, pinpoint sea ice or tug boats and other craft that may not be visible to the crew, especially on large container ships.
A prototype of the Unified Bridge system has recently entered service on the vessel Stril Luna, where it coordinates the operation of on-board equipment ranging from engines to propulsion and cargo handling.
Stril Luna is a platform supply vessel designed to pierce through the waves under harsh weather conditions, making it possible to keep a more constant speed, reducing the use of fuel and increasing on board safety.
Mikael Makinen, Rolls-Royce, President - Marine, said: 'We are entering a truly exciting period in the history of shipping, where technology, and in particular the smart use of Big Data is going to drive the next generation of ships.
'Over the next ten to 20 years we believe Ship Intelligence is going to be the driving force that will determine the future of our industry, the type of ships at sea, and the competence levels required from tomorrow's seafarers.
'The new oX bridge concept, is one example of ship intelligence, and is a glimpse into the future where significant advances to navigation, efficiency of operations and safety at sea, can be achieved.
'With the demands of environmental legislation and rising operating costs, ships are going to become more complex.
'Add to that the fact that skilled crews are already in short supply, then we see a distinct gap opening up between the complexity of ships and the competency of the people who will crew them.
'That will cause real problems for the industry, and we believe it is ship intelligence, that will fill that gap.' The oX concept, has been developed by studying user experience on ships today, and will transform the operating environment for crews on board large cargo ships and platform supply vessels.
Using advanced 3D animation to illustrate just what could be achieved in the next decade, the new concept will utilise the latest digital techniques to create safer and more energy efficient ship operations. Today, Rolls-Royce already has many of the technologies that will be part of the intelligent ships of the future.
The Unified Bridge system has recently entered service on the vessel Stril Luna, representing a new ergonomic approach to all the activity required on the bridge of a ship, coordinating the operation of on-board equipment ranging from engines to propulsion and cargo handling.
The remote monitoring of equipment on board ships is also advancing, and Rolls-Royce has control centres in Alesund, Norway, and Rauma, Finland, where many ships and thrusters are already monitored in real-time in operation around the world.
Oskar Levander, Rolls-Royce, Vice President - Innovation - Marine, speaking at a Ship Intelligence briefing in London today, said: 'Many of the technology building blocks that will control the ships of the future are already available today, but there is still work to be done to develop marine solutions from them.
'We are investing in ship intelligence, which will be a major driver of the next transition era of shipping. 'Much in the way that sail gave way to steam powered ships, and coal gave way to oil, we will see increasingly sophisticated ships, highly automated and perhaps even unmanned remote controlled, plying the seas within the next two decades.'
Earlier this year Rolls Royce revealed dramatic plans to replace cargo ships with crewless 'drone boats' controlled remotely.
The firm is developing a 'virtual deck' in Norway that would allow captains to remotely command ships anywhere in the world.
Drone ships would be safer, cheaper and less polluting for the $375 billion shipping industry that carries 90 percent of world trade, Rolls-Royce says.
Rolls-Royce has already begun the process of designing giant drone ships able to shuttle cargo across the ocean minus a single solitary human being on board.
The UK engineering group's Blue Ocean marine innovation department have announced the concept of the robot vessels they believe would be able to carry more cargo, cut costs, be safer and produce less pollution.
Cameras would beam 360-degree views from the drone ship back to operators based in a virtual bridge VR system in Norway navigating the vessel remotely to steer them to their destinations.
Talks have commenced over any regulatory obstacles and potential perceived hurdles and Rolls Royce are optimistic that the drone ships may be operational in ten years time.
A Rolls-Royce Spokesperson says: 'Some steps have already been taken, mainly in the naval area, but we believe a first step will be moving certain functions on a ship ashore.
'For example, remote engine and equipment monitoring and some underwater operations - such as controlling ROVs - in the offshore sector could be the first.'
The firm has already begun outfitting ships with advanced cameras.
'A growing number of vessels are already equipped with cameras that can see at night and through fog and snow - better than the human eye, and more ships are fitted with systems to transmit large volumes of data.
'So, some questions: given that the technology is in place, is now the time to move some operations ashore? Is it better to have a crew of 20 sailing in a gale in the North Sea, or say five people in a control room on shore?
'The same person could monitor and steer many ships.'
The crewless ships would also be cheaper to build an maintain, Rolls Royce says.
'Many facilities and systems on board are only there to ensure that the crew is kept fed, safe, and comfortable.
'Eliminate or reduce the need for people, and vessels could be radically simplified, reducing construction costs.
'We think it is time to consider a roadmap to unmanned vessels of various types.'
1346
« on: December 17, 2014, 07:39:48 PM »
1347
« on: December 17, 2014, 07:27:28 PM »
From Deadline.Sony Pictures has made official what has been painfully obvious to everybody since yesterday morning, when hackers threatened to blow up movie theaters if The Interview was released next week. The studio has officially scrapped its release plans. Sony had little choice here, after the major theater chains announced earlier today they would not display the film given the threatening circumstances. Are we going to let keyboard vigilantes with a messiah complex fuck us over from now on, then?
1348
« on: December 17, 2014, 03:47:27 PM »
Jesus. Spoiler GO TO A BREAK, NOW
1349
« on: December 17, 2014, 03:36:07 PM »
GOD DAMN THIS IS JUST SO FUCKING IMPORTANT
1350
« on: December 17, 2014, 02:09:13 PM »
From the Independent.Dear Russell,
Hi. I'm Jo. You may remember me. You may even have filmed me. On Friday, you staged a publicity stunt at an RBS office, inconveniencing a hundred or so people. I was the lanky slouched guy with a lot less hair than you but (I flatter myself) a slightly better beard who complained to you that you, a multimillionaire, had caused my lunch to get cold. You started going on at me about public money and bankers' bonuses, but look, Russell, anyone who knows me will tell you that my food is important to me, and I hadn't had breakfast that morning, and I'd been standing in the freezing cold for half an hour on your whim. What mattered to me at the time wasn't bonuses; it was my lunch, so I said so.
[...]
I didn't see your arrival; I just got back from buying my lunch to discover the building's doors were locked, a film crew were racing around outside trying to find a good angle to point their camera through the windows, and you were in reception, poncing around like you were Russell bleeding Brand. From what I can gather, you'd gone in and security had locked the doors to stop your film crew following you.
My first question is, what were you hoping to achieve? Did you think a pack of traders might gallop through reception, laughing maniacally as they threw burning banknotes in the air, quaffing champagne, and brutally thrashing the ornamental paupers that they keep on diamante leashes — and you, Russell, would damningly catch them in the act? But that's on Tuesdays. I get it, Russell, I do: footage of being asked to leave by security is good footage. It looks like you're challenging the system and the powers that be want your voice suppressed. Or something. But all it really means, behind the manipulative media bullshit, is that you don't have an appointment.
Of course, Russell, I have no idea whether you could get an appointment. Maybe RBS top brass would rather not talk to you. That's their call — and, you know, some of your behaviour might make them a tad wary. Reputations are very important in banking, and, reputation-wise, hanging out with a guy who was once fired for broadcasting hardcore pornography while off his head on crack is not ideal. But surely a man who can get invited onto Question Time to discuss the issues of the day with our Lords & Masters is establishment enough to talk to a mere banker. And it would be great if you could. Have you tried, Russell? Maybe you could do an interview with one of them. An expert could answer your questions and rebut your points, and you could rebut right back at them. I might even watch that.
[...] you staged a completely futile publicity stunt. You turned up and weren't allowed in. Big wow. You know what would have happened if a rabid capitalist had just turned up unannounced? They wouldn't have been allowed in either. You know what I have in my pocket? A security pass. Unauthorised people aren't allowed in. Obviously. That's not a global conspiracy, Russell; it's basic security. Breweries have security too, and that's not because they're conspiring to steal beer from the poor. And security really matters: banks are simply crawling with highly sensitive information. Letting you in because you're a celebrity and You Demand Answers could in fact see the bank hauled in front of the FCA. That would be a scandal. Turning you away is not. I'm sorry, Russell, but it's just not.
Your response to my complaint that a multimillionaire was causing my lunch to get cold was... well, frankly, it was to completely miss the point, choosing to talk about your millions instead of addressing the real issue, namely my fucking lunch. But that's a forgivable mistake. We all have our priorities, Russell, and I can understand why a man as obsessed with money as I am with food would assume that's what every conversation is about. Anyway, you said that all your money has been made privately, not through taxation. Now, that, Russell, is actually a fair point. Well done.
Although I can't help but notice that you have no qualms about appearing on the BBC in return for money raised through one of the most regressive taxes in the country, a tax which leads to crippling fines and even jail time for thousands of poor people and zero rich people. But never mind. I appreciate that it's difficult for a celeb to avoid the BBC, even if they're already a multimillionaire and can totally afford to turn the work down. Ah, the sacrifices we make to our principles for filthy lucre, eh, Russell? The condoms and hairspray won't buy themselves. Or, in my case, the pasta.
And then there is that film you're working on, isn't there, for which I understand your production company is benefitting from the Enterprise Investment Scheme, allowing the City investors funding your film to avoid tax. Was that the film you were making on Friday, Russell, when you indignantly pointed out to me that none of your money comes from the taxpayer? Perhaps it had slipped your mind.
[...]
But still, you're broadly right. Leaving aside the money you make from one of the most regressive of the UK's taxes, and the tax exemptions your company uses to encourage rich City investors to give you more money, and the huge fees you've accepted from one of the planet's most notorious and successful tax avoidance schemes, you, Russell, have come by your riches without any effect on taxpayers. Whereas RBS got bailed out. Fair point.
Here's the thing about the bailout of RBS, Russell: it's temporary. The plan was never to bail out a bank so that it could then go bust anyway. [...] Not only that, but it looks as if the government will eventually sell RBS for more than they bought it for. In other words, the taxpayer will make a profit on this deal.
[...]
But here's the key thing you need to know about bonuses, Russell: they come with conditions attached. [...] in general terms, bonuses have conditions attached, such as “And we'll claw back every penny if we discover you were breaking the rules.” And yes, it does happen.
[...]
And now, if I may, a word about your manner.
[...]
Because, you see, Russell, when you accosted me, you started speaking to me with your nose about two inches from mine. That's pretty fucking aggressive, Russell.[...] I'm sure that, like turning up with a megaphone instead of an appointment, such an aggressive invasion of personal space makes for great footage: you keep talking to someone in that chatty reasonable affable tone of yours, and they react with anger. Makes them look unreasonable. Makes it look like they're the aggressive ones. Makes it look like people get flustered in the face of your incisive argument. When in fact they're just getting flustered in the face of your face.
I've been thinking about this the last couple of days, Russell, and I can honestly say that the only other people ever to talk to me the way you did were school bullies. It's been nearly a quarter of a century since I had to deal with such bastards, so I was caught quite off my guard. Nice company you're keeping. Now I think about it, they used to ruin my lunchtimes too.
One last thing, Russell. Who did you inconvenience on Friday? Let's say that you're right, and that the likes of Fred Goodwin need to pay. OK, so how much trouble do you think Fred faced last Friday as a result of your antics? Do you think any of his food got cold, Russell? Even just his tea? I somehow doubt it. How about some of the millionaire traders you despise so much (some of whom are nearly as rich as you, Russell)? Well, no, because you got the wrong fucking building. (Might want to have a word with your researchers about that.) Which brings us back to where we came in: a bunch of admittedly fairly well paid but still quite ordinary working people, admin staff mostly, having their lives inconvenienced and, in at least one case, their lunches quite disastrously cooled, in order to accommodate the puerile self-aggrandising antics of a prancing multimillionaire. If you had any self-awareness beyond agonising over how often to straighten your fucking chest-hair, you'd be ashamed.
It was paella, by the way. From Fernando's in Devonshire Row. I highly recommend them: their food is frankly just fantastic.
When it's hot. I fucking hate Russell Brand.
Pages: 1 ... 434445 4647 ... 67
|