"I want to stay in this service."
"Well you should have thought of that before you decided to become a lesbian."
Hi everyone, thank you for your patience. We’re getting very close to launching our Kickstarter! Here are a few updates, including specs!
Due to copious feedback, we have changed Axent from on-the-ear to over-the-ear, and added a small microphone to the cable.
40 mm driver
20 Hz to 20 KHz frequency response
15-30 ounces in weight
USB charging or 3.5 mm Jack included
You can sign up to be notified athttp://www.axentwear.com/!
You’ll be seeing a lot of changes to the website soon. We’ve been working very hard to bring you the best product that we can! Stay tuned :)
This is Foo-Chan, the Japanese equivalent of Grumpy Cat. But instead of being grumpy, he just looks like he’s disappointed all of the time.
Mom’s DNA Game is STRONG.
yeah disney should make a movie about them
This is so misleading that it is frankly a lie.
First of all, “Scientists” haven’t solved anything except determined the results of a DNA test—matching a still-living descendent of the sister of a mental patient with a 126-year-old semen stain on the shawl of a single woman thought to be killed by the Ripper.
- The idea that they could have a “100% match” is highly tenuous at best; siblingship is a tricky thing to discover through DNA to begin with, and vastly more so when you take into account that they’re testing the descendent of a sibling. There’s a reason that whenever possible, geneticists prefer to test a parent as well as a sibling, given how many DNA loci are recombined to form a sibling’s DNA. They also “matched” the shawl’s owner’s bloodstain to her “three-times great-granddaughter,” proving again a “100% match.”
- The DNA evidence has not been independently verified by any authorities.
- The shawl itself, the one and only piece of physical evidence, has not been independently verified. It “is thought” to have been part of the case.
- The lead detective on the case is not a detective. He is a self-proclaimed “armchair detective” and history nut.
- He is selling a book about this. It doesn’t take an “armchair detective” to realize that a book about looking for Jack the Ripper’s identity is not going to turn a profit without showing “conclusive proof” that they’ve found the killer.
- His only other proof is the fact that Kosminski was recorded as a suspect in the 1800s by the police, who were notedly anti-Semetic (Kosminski was a Polish Jew).
- This “study,” if it can even be called that when the information was clearly biased, was reported in the Daily Mail and the Mirror, not exactly shining bastions of journalism. Look for it to be discredited very soon. I’m betting Cracked’s “B.S. News Stories that Fooled Your Facebook Friends” gets there within a week.
- The apparently brilliant scientist that has pioneered this new DNA matching technology, Dr. Jari Louhelainen, is hardly a standout in his field. He is not decorated, has received no awards or fellowships that I’ve been able to find, and is a professor at a college that has turned out only one notable alumnus in the scientific field, ever (and she is an astrophysicist).
- Even if the shawl and its two spots of purported DNA were not obviously of over-inflated importance (and if they could be verified), that is far from saying the mystery of Jack the Ripper is solved. All that would be in today’s courtroom is a single piece of circumstantial evidence for ONE of five serial murders.
- The newspaper that reported this is a tabloid.
- The “detective” is an amateur with a book to sell.
- The “scientist” is a lecturer at a new university in England that focuses on sports.
- The “evidence” is over-hyped and far from conclusive.
- The “evidence” only points to Kosminski for ONE murder out of five.
This is not research. This is sensationalism. The mystery of Jack the Ripper is far from solved.
So glad to see this rebuttal.
Also there’s no real evidence that Aaron Kosminski is the same Kosminski that was questioned by the police. There’s one memo with his surname on it and that’s literally the only primary source there is, the rest is over a century of authors taking the idea and running off with it (including some obviously horribly anti-Semitic writers with an agenda).
Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.
Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.
"BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?" screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. "You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!"
"But where will people get the incentive to work?!" Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. "You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
"But who will serve me?" grumbled Marty McMoneybags. "Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”
I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!
The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.
reblogging for more top commentary
They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.
The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.
This is wonderful commentary and I really really hope that we can have something like this in the US
I’m reblogging this TWICE because I love it that much