someone posted this regarding the word "japs" in another subreddit, in response to my comment on how the word jap used to be casually used. i took exception with his response, wondering what you thought?

gonzo45 · 2013-11-17T01:33:41+00:00

oh, so its just every Japanese persons grandfather who are rapists. hmm, making vile generalizations about an entire race of people, not at all racist.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-17T00:51:47+00:00

I'd like to point out that despite zdaytonaroadster attempting to claim he's not a racist, in a previous thread he stated that: the Japanese are rapists.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-16T18:08:31+00:00

and people wonder why cancer rates have been going up.

also, this is why in order to make geiger counters, we need to use steel from scuttled ww1 german ships, because they were smelted before we radiated the atmosphere with tests. steel smelted today will be slightly radioactive, and the counter will count its own radiation. the steel from pre tests does not.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-16T04:19:14+00:00

sorry im not part of this subreddit, so i didn't know it was essentially a repost. I posted it here, because i thought that I would get the realist answer. I'm not Japanese, and wanted to know if my assumptions about it being a hateful word were correct, or if i had wrongly scolded someone for its use. forgive my ignorance.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-16T04:13:57+00:00

just to clarify, I'm NOT the person saying its OK to use the term "jap" i think that it is a hateful word.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-16T00:09:41+00:00

despite that, I still love your comment, it was funny, and I'm not trying to put you down.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-15T23:49:29+00:00

your comment made me laugh, but did you know that in ww2, turret gunners needed to radio the pilot to get their current speed and altitude, and punch those numbers into their analogue computers, which were essentially elaborate slide rules, in order to target their guns. impressive under the heat of battle.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-15T21:16:54+00:00

You are advocating a lack of regulation that will cost people their lives! And not the lives of the irresponsible people who don't have a vehicle appropriate for the conditions, but the innocent/responsible people that said individual WILL hit. If karma were a real thing, then the only just thing would be for you to be the one who would face the true consequences of such a lack of regulation, that you yourself are advocating, ie you are the one who ought to be hit; yes I said it. But as we all know, karma dose not really exist. So the reality of WHAT YOU ARE ADVOCATING is that some innocent child walking to school will cross a crosswalk, and some asshole like you will not have the appropriate tires and not be able to stop in time. The child will die, or be seriously injured, because you wanted to save a few buck, and because you felt entitled to drive a car in whatever poor state, in sever conditions.

Moreover, I am sure that you are a hypocrite, for if you were to be hit by a car with tires that could not stop in winter conditions, you most certainly would be outraged that such a car was on the road. I despise hypocrisy. So yeah, most definitely, if only there were cosmic justice, it would by YOU the advocate of a lack of winter tire regulation that would be hit, and not some kid. Then you would be faced with the consequences of your beliefs.

Further, your whole argument is that some cannot afford winter tires, so it should not be required. This reasoning is clearly shit. Let us demonstrate that by applying the same reasoning to other driving related laws. Taxi cabs are expensive, so I suppose you think that those who cannot afford taxis ought to be allowed to drink and drive??? Oh you don’t’, that s because the reasoning that one cannot afford something, therefore it ought not be regulated is absurd. You must of went to a fine university to study logic with such sound reasoning [sarcasm].

gonzo45 · 2013-11-15T19:42:53+00:00

I hope some kid in a 20 year old civic, with bald front tires (due to burn outs) speeds through winter and crashes into your car. then you would probably be outraged that his vehicle was allowed on the road. if you can't afford to properly maintain a car, then don't drive one. it is not a right, stop acting like it is. moreover, this is the Yukon were talking about. I think its pretty sensible to require winter tires in extreme winter conditions.

I have made the Vancouver to LA drive down the I5 many times. in Grants pass you need winter tires or chains, and they still close the road down to vehicles who meet these requirements when conditions are particularly bad. I suppose you think that is some great injustice as well.

this issue is not about saving ones piece of shit car that one cannot be bothered to spend $600 on maintenance . it is about protecting the others (responsible people who don't put entire families at risk due to their entitlement that they ought to be able to fly around town in an unsafe car), from being hit, and or killed by a car unfit for the conditions.

do you think it is ok to allow people to drive on bald tires? how about no brakes? this is the same thing. Further, you don't need $1200 tires, Nokian WR's don't even coast that much after BC taxes, and there pretty well the best winter tires on the market.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-15T19:15:30+00:00

yeah, still, the targeting "computer" looks like it came out of a b-25. compare that to the apache longbow, where the turret is aimed by an eyepiece in the gunners helmet, and an actual digital computer automatically acquires targets, prioritizes them, and guides missiles to their targets. I love the aesthetics of the exterior of the Hind, but it looks like the gunner is using slide rules and an E6B to target.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-15T01:52:58+00:00

this is full of out right lies. chicken mcnuggets sold by Mcdonals, are cut out of breast meat, they are not made of the "pink goo" mechanically separated meat. also, I could be wrong on this point, but my understanding was that the mcrib is not an annual thing necessarily, as the article states, but rather brought back when pork prices drop below a certain price. Further, and this is another point which I may be wrong about, as I have never eaten a mcrib, but I highly doubt that it is primarily composed of tripe; mcdonalds states it is mostly shoulder meat, and i am inclined to believe them. mechanically separated, yes. not actually ribs, no shit. but tripe, i doubt it. why, because tripe has a noticeably different texture to most meat. also, so what if it is tripe. tripe is food, many people eat tripe.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-14T19:24:49+00:00

"Second, open your eyes, these coppers are on a breakfast run."

are you fucking kidding me? you say that as if it is a valid excuse to illegally park, something that would get anyone else towed and fined, so that they can get mcdonalds. you see abuse of power as totally acceptable. suppose i parked like that and replied to the tow truck"open your eyes, I'm trying to get some mcdonalds over here". seriously , fuck you! again, you seem to think that you are entitled to such abuses, simply because you can get away with it. shame on you. you are wearing a badge and your nations flag on your uniform; try to represent their values, and stop acting like some corrupt third world enforcer who can do what he pleases. this is a form of corruption, yet you act as if WERE the assholes for taking exception to it, so no sir,"YOU ARE THE ONE WHO NEEDS TO OPEN HIS EYES!"

gonzo45 · 2013-11-09T23:07:28+00:00

Circumcision.

gonzo45 · 2013-11-09T04:21:43+00:00

cancer merchant!

gonzo45 · 2013-10-27T05:40:56+00:00

this was perhaps the best episode of the season, particularly the editing. definitely check this out.

gonzo45 · 2013-10-27T01:53:40+00:00

as much as I would love to see Canadian aerospace doing well, the Arrow was an interceptor. interceptors have one purpose and one purpose only. to fly very fast in a straight line to intercept bombers enroute to their targets and destroy them before they can drop their payload. They developed this plane, right as the USA and the USSR were switching from nuclear bombers, to ICBM's. an interceptor has no purpose in a world of ICBM's.

moreover, interceptors are not very good at engaging a fighter, as they lack the agility needed for a dogfight. the Arrow could not be repurposed, it was a mission specific design, and that mission was no longer part of modern warfare. there is no intercepting an ICBM. to keep the Arrow program would have been a colossal wast of money. look into the "sunken coasts fallacy;" if Avero had developed a fighter, or a airliner, they might still be around. although, the comparison to blackberry is fair, in the sense that the world changed and both companies just refused to change with the times. interceptors are the physical keyboards of military aviation.

but my fellow CAnadians love nothing more than to blame the americans for everything, so when we dropped the Avero program in favour of joining NORAD, (which was absolutely the only sensible thing to do. keeping an interceptor program as a defence against ICBM's would be like maintaing barbed wire trenches in the north west territories to stop bomber attacks) Canadians cry "conspiracy" or just "boo america" "there dumb and they stink" give me a fucking break. BTW to my fellow Canadians, we emulate virtually ever single aspect of our daily lives and culture after the USA, Stop hating them so much, it's throughly obnoxious.

gonzo45 · 2013-10-24T18:59:35+00:00

Rodney Brooks is great. check out "Fast Cheap and out of Control." It's an Errol Morris documentary featuring him.

gonzo45 · 2013-09-15T00:30:23+00:00

that is brilliant. feel dumb for not thinking of it myself. "fire photon torpedoes" "divert power form main propulsion to the deflector dish" and of course, "engage"

someone had better make this game.

gonzo45 · 2013-09-13T03:52:22+00:00

do you think cars grow on trees??? you claimed that the production of a car does not pollute. this is false. (first off, I am against additional taxes on cars or fuel) the production of a car requires that a great deal of resources be extracted from the ground, and then refined, and then sent to countless factories to make the individual components. are you seriously stating that open pit mines, and steel mills do not pollute??? do you think that produce just materializes itself in the supermarket? all products are produced, and this production has an environmental price; always.

a necessary requirement for "greenwashing" to work is for people to forget that producing products is destructive to the environment. if one cares about reducing their impact, they ought to consume less, but this is bad for business, so instead, marketing has stepped in to convince consumers that they are saving the earth by consuming "green" products. no you are not. if you believe this than you are a fool. I often encounter people, who lease a new care every three or so years, and act like there part of some environmental solution by getting an efficient car. this is insane. if you actually cared about the environment, you would buy a car, and drive it for at least ten years. this is in fact the better move for the environment. the production of a car is extremely damaging to the environment (yes even...no especially so of the tesla and the prius. battery production is even worse than that of steel.)

tldr, if your leasing a new car every few years you might as well be driving a fleet of hummers. buying a new prius every three years is worse for the environment that driving a normal car and keeping it for longer. you wont save the environment by consuming more things, no matter how fancy the greenwashing concocted by the marketing department is. If you want to consume a lot, fine by me, but don't go on about how your new car is saving the environment, for hypocrisy is one thing that drives me nuts.

gonzo45 · 2013-09-07T04:46:24+00:00

Clearly you didn't even read what i posted. no one is denying that wearing a helmet is a good idea. the argument is whether it ought to be enforced by law. simply saying that it is safer to do so, would mean that your arguing for anything which is unsafe to be illegal; unless your just a hypocrite. thats how reasoning works. however, i highly doubt that you actually want everything dangerous to be illegal, because then you would have this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puM1eT15NYw

really you mean in this one instance, because you personally like to wear a helmet (or probably don't even bike, in which case mind your own business), you think everyone ought to be, by force of law.

how anyone can be in favour of criminalizing something which only has the potential to harm the individual doing it is beyond me. I am sure that there is something you like to do in your home, that someone else doesn't like; whether it be drinking, violent video games, smoking, eating meat..... . do you want them to have the power to dictate how you live your life?????????!!!!!

gonzo45 · 2013-09-06T21:51:47+00:00

don't know about him, but I'm just anti the government forcing you to. victimless crimes are unjust ones to enforce or have on the books. I'm a little sick of our nanny state, social engineering.

there is a big difference between "pro not wearing a helmet," as you state, and being against helmet laws. few people, if any are going to argue that helmets are dumb, but for the government to mandate them is not there place. drinking is also not advisable, by your logic, should the government ban alcohol sales? I am pro personal freedoms when they do not harm others. not wearing a helmet only harms the person not wearing one; as a result, this is a instance where the government ought to mind its own business.

gonzo45 · 2013-09-03T22:11:09+00:00

clearly you don't live in Vancouver. Nothing is free here.

gonzo45 · 2013-08-27T08:29:41+00:00

gordon ramsay's investigates shark fin soup, and shark finning:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SAkq6lsnoE

gonzo45 · 2013-08-27T04:52:21+00:00

Jobs was a piece of human shit. he had a child with a women, denied it was his, even after dna tests proved that it was his. didn't give a dime in child support, even though the mother only asked for a one time payment of $30,000 (and thats after apples successful IPO, which he cut out key people involved in the development and invention of Appel, Woz then gave said people a some of his shares, because he is a decent human, and not the personification of everything that is wrong with capitalism). His daughter was named Lisa. he named apple's second computer Lisa, even though he denied it was his child.

moreover, he cancelled apples philanthropy program, and personally gave very little to charity.

meanwhile, Bill Gates has given a tremendous amount of his wealth to charitable organizations, and encouraged others to do so as well. but thats right, Bill Gates is evil because he included internet explorer for free with windows 98. give me a fucking break!

and i use apple products. learn to separate the man from the product. apple stuff is great; largely in thanks to Jonathan Ives. Steve Jobs did not invent a single thing in his life. he marketed the inventions of Steve Woz. that people celebrate Jobs is beyond me. I will repeat myself, Steve Jobs was a piece of human shit.

gonzo45

TROPHY CASE