caze

at least he took Rubio down with him: https://youtu.be/U_Gg6ggghoI?t=104

christie out now, ran out of money.

yeah, Better Call Saul actually has likeable characters, Breaking Bad was great, but everyone was an asshole really.

only 1% of votes in

I'm pretty sure Aphex's next album won't be a series of John Philip Sousa covers. John Baptiste Philouza would be great though.

though it wouldn't preclude individual states from becoming more socialist, within certain limits. also, think about how near impossible it's been for Obama to try and get anything done, imagine the size of the battle Comrade Sanders would have on his hands to achieve his loftier goals. though maybe the well has been poisoned to such a degree now that it doesn't even matter what their policies are, the Republicans are just going to be utter cunts to whichever democrat gets in there.

Why do you think that? wut?

in a socialist system everyone's computers would restart at the same time, and it would take three hours.

they're not actually that socialist. I'm wondering what this "actual socialism" is that is hardly present in Europe. And I really don't agree with presenting socialism and capitalism as opposing ideologies. Not necessarily your thing, I know, as Limpster brought it up. But, imo it's really unproductive to view it as such. Socialism and libertarianism are more natural opposing forces. Which your post already implied as well, obviously. Another point is the thing about governments being small, local and not interfering with markets too much. Although I do understand the desire to minimise the proverbial red tape, the 'solution' is not to keep governments small and local. To be honest, that sounds more like remixing talking-points made by those lovely corporations which are out to maximise short term profits. It'd be really stupid to localise governments in a world with global corporations which present bigger economies than the average country. It doesn't take much for corporations to become more powerful than local governments. The more local the governments are, the more powerful the corporations, I'd argue. Lets find some middle ground in the idea that governments should be optimised wrt the world they live in, such that democratic principles are protected (wrt the markets, and individual people). Sometimes that means making international laws possible (think about climate change and the way corporations pay their taxes) and other times that means keeping things local. It's not an either or thing. (which I'm sure you weren't trying to argue) Whatever is good from a democratic point of view, I guess. Or lets argue that markets can't exist without some kind of regulation. And that the size of the market should be similar to the size of the government which regulates it. Read: global markets require (some kind of) global governments. Whether or not europe is socialist is a bit of a strawman, imo. If you (anyone) want to talk about organising healthcare and whether or not there is a place for a market, fine, there's a discussion. Minimum wages? Sure, another discussion. Implementing policies wrt fossile fuels another example. And the list goes on and on...obv. I wrote a great big long reply to this, solved all of the world's problems and everything, then my fucking computer restarted to install a fucking update.

only in terms of certain things, they're probably more principled free marketeers than anyone in america, when it comes to fiscal policy and such. it also helps that they're small countries, socialism only gets worse the larger scales it gets deployed at.

because top-down control of human interaction is a bad idea in principle (the world is simply too complicated a place to think we can control it at the political level), it leads to very bad things. even if the intentions are good, when there's only one end result it's not much of an excuse. there's very little actual socialism in europe btw, if that's what you're hinting at, we're mostly capitalist with the odd bit of socialism thrown in here and there. but socialism is alive and well in many places outside of europe, and it's just as bad now there as it's always been. I'm not against pragmatic application of minimal amounts of socialism where necessary btw, I'm not a libertarian or anything. But primarily governments should be small, local, and not interfere with markets too much (aside from banking and preventing monopolies and price fixing cartels, i.e. protecting the freedom of the market - something which hasn't been done a lot recently). of course there are many political theories of non-top down socialism, they've not really been attempted on a large scale though (or even been particularly successful on a small scale), and there's every reason to believe they're just as silly an idea as radical libertarianism. this could change at some indeterminate time in the future if facilitated by large technological advances, but we're nowhere near that now. they're not actually that socialist.

great job, must have been a pain in the arse to transcribe the whole thing.

socialism is worse than crony capitalism though, much better we had capitalism for everyone instead.

lol

on listening to the original it sounds exactly the same ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

yeah, this jumped out to me in the first seconds of listening to it. haven't compared to the original yet though.

doesn't look like you can taste the suffering on that one, not for me.

Pato's injury problems are over apparently, was due to a growth spurt he had while in Italy. He's been good in Brazil, but it's a big step up to continue looking an attacking threat in the premier league.

lol

Babylon 5 was great, the CGI was hilariously bad though.

I haven't seen the last two episodes of the Expanse yet, but I've been pretty disappointed with it overall. It's got some good elements, the political shit, the universe they've created, good physics grounding. But it really sucks in terms of writing from a dramatic standpoint, and the acting is pretty shit (both are well below what BSG was capable of). It also looks pretty bad, I guess it kind of looks like what a Babylon 5 budget gets you in 2016, which is obviously better than Babylon 5, but still not amazing, and a lot of the problems could have been fixed (the colour grading is poor, too gloomy and high contrast, for example).

It's also possible that the more intelligent a species gets the more it realises that interstellar space travel is not worth the hassle, it seems likely that superluminal travel is impossible in principle, even things like wormholes as a form of travel may be impossible (or maybe just sufficiently infeasible due to energy requirements). Maybe super intelligent species will be content to stick around their home systems, and instead of focusing their intellect on understanding the rest of the galaxy they instead focus on ever smaller scales. Eventually converting the entirety of the matter orbiting their suns into a living computational substrate containing the totality of their knowledge and consciousness (a dyson sphere). Huddling around the warmth of their suns until eventually they extinguish and the intelligence fades away into nothing. Or maybe that scenario will be one of many, maybe the universe favors those types to those with a more inquisitive/exploring mentality. It could be there are thousands of such intelligences within our galaxy, and only a handful of explorers. Or it could be the other way around, or any combination in between.

autists can shape shift? autists = reptilians CONFIRMED

or maybe if they're intellectually advanced enough they would be capable of lowering their discourse and even changing their appearance to match our expectations and converse in a perfectly reasonable manner, the very concept would be pretty weird to begin with but maybe they could do their best to prevent it from being too fucked up.

this was really good actually, slice of life stagey drama, great acting, alan alda and steve buscemi were great.