Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:54 PM, bendish said:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/trump-pulls-out-of-climate-deal-western-rift-deepens-a-1150486.html

  Quote

 

The president presented his political statement as a nationalist manifesto of the most imbecilic variety. It couldn't have been any worse.

lol dat hyperbole phat af tho

Couldn't have been any worse? Really? Nothing he said could've been worse? Fucking idiot.

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:58 PM, ambermonk said:

I think any male who goes out of their way to prove that they're the alpha actually isn't. It's an all balls, no brains competition.

Agreed. The whole alpha/beta male construct is ridiculous anyway. That said, social interactions do carry weight and require nuance, which (depending on the situation and so on) can sometimes include things like a firm handshake.

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:58 PM, ambermonk said:

I think any male who goes out of their way to prove that they're the alpha actually isn't. It's an all balls, no brains competition.

  On 6/5/2017 at 7:11 PM, auxien said:

 

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:54 PM, bendish said:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/trump-pulls-out-of-climate-deal-western-rift-deepens-a-1150486.html

  Quote

 

The president presented his political statement as a nationalist manifesto of the most imbecilic variety. It couldn't have been any worse.

lol dat hyperbole phat af tho

 

Couldn't have been any worse? Really? Nothing he said could've been worse? Fucking idiot.

 

 

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:58 PM, ambermonk said:

I think any male who goes out of their way to prove that they're the alpha actually isn't. It's an all balls, no brains competition.

Agreed. The whole alpha/beta male construct is ridiculous anyway. That said, social interactions do carry weight and require nuance, which (depending on the situation and so on) can sometimes include things like a firm handshake.

 

Couldn't have been worse....until his next visit....or next tweet....or next breath.

  On 6/5/2017 at 6:54 PM, bendish said:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/trump-pulls-out-of-climate-deal-western-rift-deepens-a-1150486.html

interesting article!

hope the eu gets its shit together

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/06/how-the-trump-russia-data-machine-games-google-to.html

tl;dr: nothing new really, Google search results (and probably Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are being gamed by misinformation and SEO industry to try and create "truth" and make you think Trump really is a victim of persecution and anyways What About Her Emails, etc.

  On 6/5/2017 at 2:38 PM, WeAreOceans said:

 

  On 6/5/2017 at 4:53 AM, thawkins said:

 

Good read this, I would say that conservatives and the right using masculine identity isn't massively ground breaking though... even good old fashioned 30s/40s fascist propaganda banged on about non-fashies being big girly twats. Overall probably ties in to the whole "I worked hard and earned all this and you don't deserve a cut". If anything, riches built off taking profits and labour off the proles would be considered an added bonus for your macho competitiveness.

 

But yeah, definitions of masculinity definitely need a rework for the modern age, and the guy is bang-on about the left not learning from this (if anything certain radical lefties outright alienate dudes).

 

I would say that the kind of guy who invests his masculine identity into big ol trucks and military fetishisation and the like probably isn't massively secure in their identity in the first place tho - could be argued "changing times" don't help this.

 

By the way one of my takeaways is also that I'm not immune to this shit either, nobody is. This sort of brainfuck advertising/marketing mind control will work to an extent regardless of what you know, because they're using all the clever techniques developed by cognitive psychologists and neuroscientists to hit you straight in your reptilian brain in order to trigger emotions and shut down rational thought.

I guess it was kind of fine when they used it to sell you a better laundry detergent, but now this identity/reality building shit has got so good that it's possible to sell people the illusion that an egotistical billionaire is now a man of the people.

  On 6/6/2017 at 3:38 AM, thawkins said:

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/06/how-the-trump-russia-data-machine-games-google-to.html

 

tl;dr: nothing new really, Google search results (and probably Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are being gamed by misinformation and SEO industry to try and create "truth" and make you think Trump really is a victim of persecution and anyways What About Her Emails, etc.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/06/05/associated-press-piece-sounds-like-a-trump-slam-its-actually-a-clinical-fact-check/?utm_term=.67adb316d6b5

  On 6/6/2017 at 3:38 AM, thawkins said:

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/06/how-the-trump-russia-data-machine-games-google-to.html

 

tl;dr: nothing new really, Google search results (and probably Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are being gamed by misinformation and SEO industry to try and create "truth" and make you think Trump really is a victim of persecution and anyways What About Her Emails, etc.

:beardstroke:

may not be "new news" but it's a topic always worth remembering, thanks for the link

REALITY WINNER....is an actual name. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/05/reality-winner-russia-us-election-hack-nsa-leak

Oh, real-leigh?

so...this strangely proves it wasn't fake news, dear mr drump? the leaked info was authentic..etc

Who the fuck names their kid Reality Winner? I thought she was some reality TV star or some shit lol

"She has a sister, Brittany, who is studying for a PhD in Pharmacology and Toxicology at Michigan State University and did not respond to an email."

Why does The Guardian think anyone needs to know this?

  On 6/6/2017 at 12:52 PM, doublename said:

"She has a sister, Brittany, who is studying for a PhD in Pharmacology and Toxicology at Michigan State University and did not respond to an email."

 

Why does The Guardian think anyone needs to know this?

Brittany Winner?  whadda winner

I can see why you would ask this, but my UK-centric prejudice had me reading this girl as an office drone and insignificant ...based on her name (WTF!!) and location.....but then read on to find she speaks 3 middle eastern languages - I presume the fact that her sister is doing a PhD outwith Da South gives Reality and her family some additional kodus as not your average Joes

I think that's about 27-nil to Putin now? You win, tovarisch

  On 6/5/2017 at 4:53 AM, thawkins said:

Also with regard to climate change, I read a book where one guy analyzed how to fill the world's energy need with renewable stuff. It's free and it's really good, because usually there are no calculations when people are talking about renewable energy. So the take-away for me was that a) it's fucking difficult to replace all energy needs with renewables and b) life will probably be noticeably more uncomfortable, because there's so much stuff that comes from oil or is cheap because coal is cheap.

The reason fossil fuels are so cheap is that it's subsidized by trillions of dollars globally. Move that subsidizing to renewables and that would help bigly in cutting carbon emissions. Coal use is already declining due to the markets, so Trump's pledge to save coal country is DOA, the market has spoken! And besides none of the top industries would be profitable if they actually paid for their environmental and social impact. I always wondered why oil companies raking in billions in profits needed subsidies. But I guess that's what an army of lobbyists gets you.

donald trump stole money from a kid's cancer charity and funneled the monies into the trump organization

  On 6/6/2017 at 11:12 PM, Nebraska said:

donald trump stole money from a kid's cancer charity and funneled the monies into the trump organization

Yeah because he's a piece of shit. And all of the people still supporting him are the corn kernels embedded within.

  On 6/7/2017 at 1:33 AM, ambermonk said:

 

  On 6/6/2017 at 11:12 PM, Nebraska said:

donald trump stole money from a kid's cancer charity and funneled the monies into the trump organization

Yeah because he's a piece of shit. And all of the people still supporting him are the corn kernels embedded within.

 

i'm sure it's fake news!

  On 6/6/2017 at 10:00 PM, azatoth said:

 

  On 6/5/2017 at 4:53 AM, thawkins said:

Also with regard to climate change, I read a book where one guy analyzed how to fill the world's energy need with renewable stuff. It's free and it's really good, because usually there are no calculations when people are talking about renewable energy. So the take-away for me was that a) it's fucking difficult to replace all energy needs with renewables and b) life will probably be noticeably more uncomfortable, because there's so much stuff that comes from oil or is cheap because coal is cheap.

The reason fossil fuels are so cheap is that it's subsidized by trillions of dollars globally. Move that subsidizing to renewables and that would help bigly in cutting carbon emissions. Coal use is already declining due to the markets, so Trump's pledge to save coal country is DOA, the market has spoken! And besides none of the top industries would be profitable if they actually paid for their environmental and social impact. I always wondered why oil companies raking in billions in profits needed subsidies. But I guess that's what an army of lobbyists gets you.

 

Yeah of course the cheap price in $$$ is also an issue, but the point of that book was rather that in terms of kilowatts of energy, how is it even possible to replace today's energy needs with renewables. And the result was basically that with current usage trends, renewables won't be able to replace everything, you'd have to build nuclear also to be good for the next 1000 years or so. But of course the efficiency of solar has grown loads during the last 10 years, and since the author has sadly passed away, there's no update on the calculations I'm aware of. So basically even if we replace everything with renewables, we probably have to cut down on usage heavily as well, which will influence lifestyles a lot.

  On 6/7/2017 at 4:00 AM, thawkins said:

 

  On 6/6/2017 at 10:00 PM, azatoth said:

 

  On 6/5/2017 at 4:53 AM, thawkins said:

Also with regard to climate change, I read a book where one guy analyzed how to fill the world's energy need with renewable stuff. It's free and it's really good, because usually there are no calculations when people are talking about renewable energy. So the take-away for me was that a) it's fucking difficult to replace all energy needs with renewables and b) life will probably be noticeably more uncomfortable, because there's so much stuff that comes from oil or is cheap because coal is cheap.

The reason fossil fuels are so cheap is that it's subsidized by trillions of dollars globally. Move that subsidizing to renewables and that would help bigly in cutting carbon emissions. Coal use is already declining due to the markets, so Trump's pledge to save coal country is DOA, the market has spoken! And besides none of the top industries would be profitable if they actually paid for their environmental and social impact. I always wondered why oil companies raking in billions in profits needed subsidies. But I guess that's what an army of lobbyists gets you.

 

Yeah of course the cheap price in $$$ is also an issue, but the point of that book was rather that in terms of kilowatts of energy, how is it even possible to replace today's energy needs with renewables. And the result was basically that with current usage trends, renewables won't be able to replace everything, you'd have to build nuclear also to be good for the next 1000 years or so. But of course the efficiency of solar has grown loads during the last 10 years, and since the author has sadly passed away, there's no update on the calculations I'm aware of. So basically even if we replace everything with renewables, we probably have to cut down on usage heavily as well, which will influence lifestyles a lot.

 

we don't need to eliminate fossil fuel use. that would be nice, but if we just halved our carbon output it would an insanely successful achievement.

bloomberg did an interesting piece on energy trends recently, showing strength in renewables

Thx for posting the bloomberg article.

Had one big WTF moment:

  Quote

Trump’s Energy Secretary, Rick Perry, told the BNEF Summit that the U.S. should remain in the Paris climate accord, but should renegotiate it to draw out stronger pledges from European countries.

Rick Perry said what!?

Clapper gearing up for the Comey hearing on Thursday.

  Quote

"I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we're confronting now,"

http://reuters.com/article/idUSKBN18Y0SU

http://nsc.anu.edu.au/news-events/news-20170607.php

It's funny that Rick Perry didn't even know what the DoE did and wanted to eliminate it during his run for the presidency in 2012 and now he's the boss of it and all for it. I guess learning that they handle the nukes changed his mind. And a fat paycheck.