This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

WTF of Your Day

1959698100101122

Comments

  • I've seen some of their music videos before. I don't understand how they are allowed to make music.
  • That was kinda crap. All I see is an emo Darth Maul wannabe and a girl who looks like she put her outfit together entirely from a Hot Topic catalog (strike that; everyone except the RV guy looks that way) singing badly to a generic pop/dubstep track. And why do those torches remind me of that flame gif? You guys know the one.
  • edited April 2013
    Want to watch an even more painful song?



    FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU---

    I get depressed just listening to it.
    Post edited by MATATAT on
  • Cold Fusion. Not the power generation pseudoscience, but the web programming language.
  • There was a day when it was cool shit.
  • There was a day when it was cool shit.
    I know that. However, that day is long since passed and people still use it.
  • edited April 2013
    The only relevant Adobe technologies these days are Photoshop, Illustrator, and Flash/AS. Although I have seen some local employers calling for ColdFusion experience.
    Post edited by MATATAT on
  • I'd argue Flash is also dying, though not as fast as Cold Fusion.
  • edited April 2013
    Trying to foray into the world of lossless audio and I find 1: Sites selling FLAC albums for $25 and 2: people doing 96Khz/24bit FLAC files .. sourced from vinyl.
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • AS is a pain in the ass. It looks like it got a bit better with AS3 but the previous iterations were painful.
  • I can't see anything wrong with that. Little .22s designed for kids to use, rather than having to use parents out-sized rifles, that's not a bad idea. Teach them how to use it safely and properly, and it's no danger, unless we're all suddenly subscribing to the whole "guns just make you a psychotic killer" idea all of a sudden.
  • edited May 2013
    I can't see anything wrong with that. Little .22s designed for kids to use, rather than having to use parents out-sized rifles, that's not a bad idea. Teach them how to use it safely and properly, and it's no danger, unless we're all suddenly subscribing to the whole "guns just make you a psychotic killer" idea all of a sudden.
    Actually, there was a case just yesterday where a 1 year old was killed by a 5 year old with one those rifles. Granted, it was accidental, but still... It's not a case of guns making you a psycho killer... it's a case where you're way too young to fully grasp just what you're doing, even with proper education on using them safely.

    The thing is, if you're not old enough to use a full-sized rifle, you're probably not old enough to use any rifle capable of using real, live ammo. At 5, you should at most be using a BB or Airsoft gun -- something that typically won't shoot projectiles with lethal force. When you're a bit older, then you can move up to a real rifle.
    Post edited by Dragonmaster Lou on
  • Is there no age limit on handling firearms? There is for drinking and driving cars, and honestly, aren't handling guns more dangerous than driving?
  • edited May 2013
    Is there no age limit on handling firearms? There is for drinking and driving cars, and honestly, aren't handling guns more dangerous than driving?
    Depending on the state there may be limits. Generally there are exceptions for a child handling a firearm under the supervision of a parent or guardians.

    edit: To the best of my knowledge, every state has age limitations on purchasing firearms.
    Post edited by Drunken Butler on
  • Is there no age limit on handling firearms? There is for drinking and driving cars, and honestly, aren't handling guns more dangerous than driving?
    Even if there are, nobody observes them. I know 8 year olds that can shoot better than me.
  • edited May 2013
    Actually, there was a case just yesterday where a 1 year old was killed by a 5 year old with one those rifles. Granted, it was accidental, but still... It's not a case of guns making you a psycho killer... it's a case where you're way too young to fully grasp just what you're doing, even with proper education on using them safely.

    The thing is, if you're not old enough to use a full-sized rifle, you're probably not old enough to use any rifle capable of using real, live ammo. At 5, you should at most be using a BB or Airsoft gun -- something that typically won't shoot projectiles with lethal force. When you're a bit older, then you can move up to a real rifle.
    Yeah, Still not seeing the problem here. Were they not supervised in any way? Because that's real fucking dumb. You don't give a kid a dangerous anything and let them use them without supervision. What kind of deadshits do these kids have for parents, anyway?

    Hey, little jimmy, take this knife and run around in the yard! I've left my circular saw out there, play with it if you want! I'll be over here watching the NFL.

    Seriously, the problem here isn't the guns, it's the idiotic parents. Supervise your fucking kids when they're doing dangerous things, you assholes. Just because it's a gun, doesn't make it any different from handing a kid a power tool, or a sharp blade - You supervise them carefully, because it's dangerous. The nature of the dangerous object is irrelevant, the only part that matters is that it's dangerous.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Actually, there was a case just yesterday where a 1 year old was killed by a 5 year old with one those rifles. Granted, it was accidental, but still... It's not a case of guns making you a psycho killer... it's a case where you're way too young to fully grasp just what you're doing, even with proper education on using them safely.

    The thing is, if you're not old enough to use a full-sized rifle, you're probably not old enough to use any rifle capable of using real, live ammo. At 5, you should at most be using a BB or Airsoft gun -- something that typically won't shoot projectiles with lethal force. When you're a bit older, then you can move up to a real rifle.
    Yeah, Still not seeing the problem here. Were they not supervised in any way? Because that's real fucking dumb. You don't give a kid a dangerous anything and let them use them without supervision. What kind of deadshits do these kids have for parents, anyway?

    Hey, little jimmy, take this knife and run around in the yard! I've left my circular saw out there, play with it if you want! I'll be over here watching the NFL.

    Seriously, the problem here isn't the guns, it's the idiotic parents. Supervise your fucking kids when they're doing dangerous things, you assholes. Just because it's a gun, doesn't make it any different from handing a kid a power tool, or a sharp blade - You supervise them carefully, because it's dangerous. The nature of the dangerous object is irrelevant, the only part that matters is that it's dangerous.
    I guess by this extension, it's okay to allow 5 year old kids to drive cars, so long as they're being supervised, correct? If that's what you're arguing, okay, fine, I can deal with that.

  • Seriously, the problem here isn't the guns, it's the idiotic parents. Supervise your fucking kids when they're doing dangerous things, you assholes. Just because it's a gun, doesn't make it any different from handing a kid a power tool, or a sharp blade - You supervise them carefully, because it's dangerous. The nature of the dangerous object is irrelevant, the only part that matters is that it's dangerous.

  • I guess by this extension, it's okay to allow 5 year old kids to drive cars, so long as they're being supervised, correct? If that's what you're arguing, okay, fine, I can deal with that.
    Or you could extend the argument the other way and decide it's not safe to allow kids access to potatoes because they could choke.

    We give parents the responsibility to decide what is safe for their children and then to supervise their activities. Whether said object is a bicycle, a pocket knife, or a rifle. If you are is support of taking kids away from their parents and having the community raise them, then that's a different question isn't it?

  • edited May 2013
    I guess by this extension, it's okay to allow 5 year old kids to drive cars, so long as they're being supervised, correct? If that's what you're arguing, okay, fine, I can deal with that.
    No, I'm not arguing that, because A)Pretty sure 5 year olds simply are not physically capable of driving a car in any safe manner, since they can't reach the pedals, manipulate the wheel with any strength or speed, or see out of the windshield while doing these things and B)That's the dumbest fucking thing I've heard today, and I started my morning with Reddit, so that's saying something.

    I do appreciate trying to paint me as a fuckin' moron, though. It only aids my carefully cultivated image as the FRCF village idiot.
    Post edited by Churba on

  • I guess by this extension, it's okay to allow 5 year old kids to drive cars, so long as they're being supervised, correct? If that's what you're arguing, okay, fine, I can deal with that.
    Or you could extend the argument the other way and decide it's not safe to allow kids access to potatoes because they could choke.

    We give parents the responsibility to decide what is safe for their children and then to supervise their activities. Whether said object is a bicycle, a pocket knife, or a rifle. If you are is support of taking kids away from their parents and having the community raise them, then that's a different question isn't it?

    Actually, I'm only advocating keeping dangerous things out of the hands of those who are not mature enough to safely handle them and may therefore cause harm to others. There is a bit of a fine line over how much parental control should be allowed vs. how much shouldn't be there. If you're in favor of unlimited parental control, then you should also be in favor of allowing 5 year olds to drive cars provided that their parents are supervising them. If that's what you're arguing, fine, I can respect that.

    The potatoes thing is a stupid argument in that they aren't inherently dangerous, especially to others. I've never seen Alice die because Bob was choking on a potato.
  • edited May 2013
    No, I'm not arguing that, because A)Pretty sure 5 year olds simply are not physically capable of driving a car in any safe manner, since they can't reach the pedals, manipulate the wheel with any strength or speed, or see out of the windshield while doing these things and B)That's the dumbest fucking thing I've heard today, and I started my morning with Reddit, so that's saying something.
    Okay, so let's suppose someone made a car scaled appropriately to a 5 year old, so we're talking more apples and apples when compared to a rifle scaled to a 5 year old. These sorts of things essentially already exist in the form of powered go-karts that can drive along at 40+ MPH. Of course I knew that the typical five year old can't properly drive a full-sized car, just like the typical five year old probably can't handle a full-sized rifle either. So, should a 5 year old be allowed to drive a powered go-kart capable of topping 40 MPH on public roads with parental supervision?

    Edit: Also, I'm not arguing over banning vs. not banning rifles sized for 5 year olds. If nothing else, there's probably a market for sportsmen with dwarfism, for example. It's just questioning the wisdom of even making such a product. We don't see power tool companies, to use another example, making child-sized chainsaws, for example.
    Post edited by Dragonmaster Lou on
  • Okay, so let's suppose someone made a car scaled appropriately to a 5 year old, so we're talking more apples and apples when compared to a rifle scaled to a 5 year old. These sorts of things essentially already exist in the form of powered go-karts that can drive along at 40+ MPH. Of course I knew that the typical five year old can't properly drive a full-sized car, just like the typical five year old probably can't handle a full-sized rifle either. So, should a 5 year old be allowed to drive a powered go-kart capable of topping 40 MPH on public roads with parental supervision?
    On Public roads? No. On private property? Sure, go for your life. I was riding minibikes (and not-so-mini bikes) around the farm that would get around those kind of speeds when I was around that age, so it'd be hypocritical of me to say you can't do it at all. I know it's not PRECISELY equivalent to said kiddy cars, but those are not exactly easy to come by.

    Just not on public roads, because there's a difference between adequate supervision for the activity, and throwing them into a space filled with idiots that you have zero control over, all with equipment that trivially overwhelms your wee little kiddy car. Part of the role of the supervising party is to choose and acceptable location, and public roads are not a suitable location for that sort of activity. If you'd have put them out there, no matter how close you watch them, you've already failed before you started.
  • I don't feel safe driving myself on public roads, and I've been doing it for five years.
  • edited May 2013
    Okay, so let's suppose someone made a car scaled appropriately to a 5 year old, so we're talking more apples and apples when compared to a rifle scaled to a 5 year old. These sorts of things essentially already exist in the form of powered go-karts that can drive along at 40+ MPH. Of course I knew that the typical five year old can't properly drive a full-sized car, just like the typical five year old probably can't handle a full-sized rifle either. So, should a 5 year old be allowed to drive a powered go-kart capable of topping 40 MPH on public roads with parental supervision?
    On Public roads? No. On private property? Sure, go for your life. I was riding minibikes (and not-so-mini bikes) around the farm that would get around those kind of speeds when I was around that age, so it'd be hypocritical of me to say you can't do it at all. I know it's not PRECISELY equivalent to said kiddy cars, but those are not exactly easy to come by.

    Just not on public roads, because there's a difference between adequate supervision for the activity, and throwing them into a space filled with idiots that you have zero control over, all with equipment that trivially overwhelms your wee little kiddy car. Part of the role of the supervising party is to choose and acceptable location, and public roads are not a suitable location for that sort of activity. If you'd have put them out there, no matter how close you watch them, you've already failed before you started.
    Fair enough. I can see a private property exception for something like this for the reasons you mentioned. Then again, there are kids riding minibikes on public roads in my own neighborhood and I wonder if A) is that even legal (nope, at least not on public roads, and not at all if younger than 14) and B) what the hell are their parents thinking.

    On the flip side, my favorite indoor go-kart track (which does have the aforementioned 40+ MPH racing go-karts) does have a racing program for kids as young as 7. Of course, this is private property with presumably proper adult supervision and parents are required to sign the appropriate release forms.

    Again, I'm not advocating the banning of these rifles sized for smaller people, if only because, as I said, they could be used by adults of small stature as well. I'm arguing against the wisdom behind their manufacturing and marketing them for use by children. I'm also questioning the wisdom of any parent who would purchase these (as opposed to a BB gun, for example) for a kid that small. As a happy medium, I'd be perfectly okay with these being available for use at gun ranges under proper supervision similar to the 7-year-old kart racing program I mentioned above.
    Post edited by Dragonmaster Lou on
  • edited May 2013

    Fair enough. I can see a private property exception for something like this for the reasons you mentioned. Then again, there are kids riding minibikes on public roads in my own neighborhood and I wonder if A) is that even legal (nope, at least not on public roads, and not at all if younger than 14) and B) what the hell are their parents thinking.

    On the flip side, my favorite indoor go-kart track (which does have the aforementioned 40+ MPH racing go-karts) does have a racing program for kids as young as 7. Of course, this is private property with presumably proper adult supervision and parents are required to sign the appropriate release forms.
    That's a pretty cool go-kart track! You're right about the kids on minibikes in your neighborhood, that's some bad parenting right there. Especially if they're not even taking the step of watching them while they're doing it, but even with the watching, it's not a great idea, because it's not an appropriate venue for that activity. If you're not willing to take your kids somewhere more appropriate for minibike riding, then don't get them a minibike.
    Again, I'm not advocating the banning of these rifles sized for smaller people, if only because, as I said, they could be used by adults of small stature as well. I'm arguing against the wisdom behind their manufacturing and marketing them for use by children. I'm also questioning the wisdom of any parent who would purchase these (as opposed to a BB gun, for example) for a kid that small. As a happy medium, I'd be perfectly okay with these being available for use at gun ranges under proper supervision similar to the 7-year-old kart racing program I mentioned above.
    I know you're not advocating banning them entirely. The way I figure it regarding the marketing, it depends on how it goes - I think the marketing here is somewhat acceptable(but could be improved) because they're marketing it not TO children, but to adults as something FOR their children. They could push the angle that it's an alternative to larger rifles harder, though - the way it is, it's not ideal, they could do far better. It's not the worst, but that doesn't make it the best.
    Post edited by Churba on

  • Fair enough. I can see a private property exception for something like this for the reasons you mentioned. Then again, there are kids riding minibikes on public roads in my own neighborhood and I wonder if A) is that even legal (nope, at least not on public roads, and not at all if younger than 14) and B) what the hell are their parents thinking.

    On the flip side, my favorite indoor go-kart track (which does have the aforementioned 40+ MPH racing go-karts) does have a racing program for kids as young as 7. Of course, this is private property with presumably proper adult supervision and parents are required to sign the appropriate release forms.
    That's a pretty cool go-kart track! You're right about the kids on minibikes in your neighborhood, that's some bad parenting right there. Especially if they're not even taking the step of watching them while they're doing it, but even with the watching, it's not a great idea, because it's not an appropriate venue for that activity. If you're not willing to take your kids somewhere more appropriate for minibike riding, then don't get them a minibike.
    Yeah, it is. I've only gone there once or twice as it's pretty pricey ($85/person for a four heat race) and my wife isn't into that sort of thing, but it was loads of fun. The track even has an old F1 or Indycar (I forget exactly which offhand, and at first glace the two look very similar) chassis in the lobby. If you're ever up in the Boston area, maybe I should take you there.
    Again, I'm not advocating the banning of these rifles sized for smaller people, if only because, as I said, they could be used by adults of small stature as well. I'm arguing against the wisdom behind their manufacturing and marketing them for use by children. I'm also questioning the wisdom of any parent who would purchase these (as opposed to a BB gun, for example) for a kid that small. As a happy medium, I'd be perfectly okay with these being available for use at gun ranges under proper supervision similar to the 7-year-old kart racing program I mentioned above.
    I know you're not advocating banning them entirely. The way I figure it regarding the marketing, it depends on how it goes - I think the marketing here is somewhat acceptable(but could be improved) because they're marketing it not TO children, but to adults as something FOR their children. They could push the angle that it's an alternative to larger rifles harder, though - the way it is, it's not ideal, they could do far better. It's not the worst, but that doesn't make it the best.
    Very true... I'm also a bit concerned that most of the pictures they have of that thing pretty much just show children holding it with no adult supervision present, even if it's just slung on their shoulders or whatnot. If the images were instead of a child at a gun rage with an adult supervisor right next to him or her, it would be better. I'm also questioning the notion that a rifle is an appropriate gift for a 5-year-old, even if an adult will always be supervising its use. 8-10 maybe, but 5 is a bit too young. Hell, even my gun crazy uncle, who schooled me a bit on proper gun safety when he was showing me his guns (and he knows his stuff as a veteran of the Portuguese Colonial Wars in Africa), never even dreamed of the idea of getting his grandkids any sorts of guns.
  • via Omar (Mr.Roboto) on Twitter.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.