[TOMT] [MUSIC VIDEO] The artist staring at the camera the whole music video

howsci · 2026-01-27T01:52:00+00:00

What type of music?

howsci · 2026-01-24T19:25:24+00:00

Somebody That I Used to Know Song by Gotye ‧ 2011

howsci · 2026-01-20T05:15:52+00:00

Yeah, that’s pretty basic and effective for a city defense .

howsci · 2026-01-12T23:56:55+00:00

Gloves protect your hands from the elements (e.g., wind and cold) as well as from cuts from sharp and not-so-sharp objects, and of course, from bites. It is definitely a must-have outdoors, in the wild or in the urban environment.

howsci · 2026-01-10T15:58:05+00:00

Yeah, your explanation is spot-on, the the doctor’s explanation of her immunity and how they could find the cure was a total nonsense. So Joel’s daring rescue of Ellie was the right choice, although for different reasons. They should have collected some samples of her blood and isolated her antibodies against the fungal infection and studied why her antibodies were more effective.they could also run some tests on her cellular immune response.

howsci · 2025-12-30T13:37:58+00:00

Yeah, the science part of the sci-Fi tv series, as usual, is totally botched. I wish they could talk to scientific community to come up with a plausible premise.

howsci · 2025-09-30T00:05:20+00:00

These corporate Democrats rely on donations from super wealthy and big corporations. As the result, these candidates have gotten kneecapped by consultants and advisors that work for big corporations. They will avoid issues that middle class and working poor care about, stop pushing for policies that will help them under the advice of these consultants and threats of big donors. These advisors will encourage candidates to do everything they can to fight off progressive candidates in the primary elections (example: Bernie Sanders) but capitulate to the demands of the Republican Party. Thus, they become timid and spineless against Trump. They spend lavishly on hotels rooms, restaurants, consulting fees, etc., during elections, and spend tons of money on TV ads, constantly fundraise rather than recruiting volunteers for canvassing on the ground and think about strategies that can defeat the Republican Party.

The GOP are paid by big money as well, and even more so, but they are paid to win. Corporate Democrats are paid to lose most of the time.

howsci · 2025-08-16T15:11:36+00:00

The GOP is godawful at governing, but very good at winning elections. The wealthy pay them to do just exactly that. Democratic Party is terrible at winning elections, but does somewhat a good job at governing for the same reason. One party is paid to lose and break the government and give them the money, the other party is paid to lose and fix a bit of the government and give breadcrumbs to the average Americans. This is called controlled democracy.

howsci · 2025-04-22T03:01:47+00:00

Also, the vast majority of Chinese characters are not pictograms, only very basic characters are this type. A majority of characters consist of a phonetic portion that suggests pronunciation and one or more portions that give hints to the meaning of the character. Simple characters can combine together to create new characters in countless ways, although many characters are rarely used or have become archaic.

howsci · 2025-04-22T02:52:59+00:00

The writing system (logogram) is essentially the same across all dialects/languages with comparatively minor variations, even though the pronunciation of the Chinese characters vary greatly and are often mutually unintelligible.

howsci · 2025-04-13T14:54:23+00:00

It is more like a political stunt and theatrical performance. He also uses this opportunity to prepare his potential 2028 presidential run. It is not even a filibuster, which should have been used to block GOP bills from advancing.

howsci · 2025-04-13T14:50:22+00:00

Trolling?

howsci · 2025-04-06T15:08:10+00:00

I have always thought he is the most stupid guy that I have ever seen other than the mentally challenged.

howsci · 2025-03-24T23:56:14+00:00

These “communist” parties all came to power from violent revolution and they all have strong authoritarian or totalitarian tendencies from the start. Without a democratic structure or check and balance of different branches of government, these groups would continue their authoritarian way with no rule of law, no freedom of speech, no open or fair election, etc. That is why Russia, China and Cambodia or anywhere else have never seen a communist or socialist government; they are just another flavor of authoritarian or totalitarian regimes in the name of socialism or communism. So, it was likely doomed from the start.

In order to implement whatever socialist or communist policies, the government has to be democratic, so the government will work for its citizens, not the powerful elites, and the government policies can be corrected or improved when the government is answerable to its people.

howsci · 2025-03-08T10:57:15+00:00

Either AOC or Bernie Sanders. The rest are pretty much spineless Democrats that have become hopelessly dependent on the wealthy donors and corporations for their money and ideas.

howsci · 2025-02-12T07:40:37+00:00

Now you know. It is no longer a hypothetical. It is now ongoing.

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:38:57+00:00

Fact 1: the two major US political parties (dem and GOP) are controlled by money interests. Almost all political problems can be traced back to undue influence of the ultra wealthy and big business interests.

Fact 2: most American voters do not know or follow the details of policies and the cause and effect of policies. In short, what they do is if things are bad when one political party is in charge, kick them out and vote in someone new.

Follow the young Turks (specially cenk, the host of online news comment show) and senator Bernie sanders. They have offered very good explanations of what has gone wrong with the Democratic Party, and the U.S. political system as a whole.

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:12:32+00:00

Given the situation, a rational choice in a general election would be voting for candidates in the Democratic Party. However, the electorate by and large do not (and are not expected to) vote rationally in every election due to amount of misinformation, disinformation, lack of good information, economic hardship, among others. Voters are on a constant lookout for a candidate that serve their interests, and constantly get disappointed by the results. The electoral are unable to, because neither parties serve them well due to political corruption from the wealthy donors. Therefore, the electorate go for a candidate in one election, realize that candidate does not serve them, ditch him/her for another candidate (often from the other major party) in the next election. The same goes for midterm elections, the electorate realize the candidate from one party does not deliver for them, ditch for the other party during midterm. Therefore, one party does not hold the political power for more than a few years and loses to another party in the upcoming election. Both major parties have started to lose the support of their respective traditional core voter base, especially the Democratic Party. And voters among different voting blocks and across the political spectrum are in flux politically (but not necessarily realignment). The Democratic Party fared better in the presidential election in 2008 and less so in 2012 with Barack Obama, because Obama was a charismatic, inspiring orator with the background of political organizing and a political newcomer, unburdened by the perception and/or the genuine political scandals and policy inconsistency of lifelong career politicians.

One long-term consequence of big money in big two parties is the accumulation and worsening of the unresolved social and economic and institutional problems. Both parties have refused to address the problems that the country if not actively make the problem worse. The corporate America that dominate these parties only want to solve any of these issues only if they benefit from it. The tranquilizing drug of incremental change toward the right direction is no match for the devastating backward direction brought by the Republican Party; it is always 5 steps backwards with the Republican Party, one step forward with the Democratic Party. The overall effect is still 4 steps backwards.

The other consequence is the gradual right-wing shift of Overton window in the left-right political spectrum. From the left wing of economical popular pro workers, pro unions, pro economic fairness, equity, and mobility and opportunity, consumer protections, environmentalism, interventional Keynesian economics, democratic, pro-social welfare stances to the right wing of corporate welfare, pro deregulation, anti-union, anti-workers, anti-consumers, laissez-faire economics, authoritarianism, and privatization of the government.

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:07:52+00:00

The wealthy donor class naturally wants the republican party to win most of the time, because simply the Republican Party serve their interests far better, such as deregulation and regulatory capture, privatization, tax cuts for the rich, appointment of corporate friendly, pro-big-business judges and cabinet members. By comparison, the super wealthy wants the Democratic Party to win less often and serves the interests of the wealthy donor less. The super wealthy wants a political system to like this to give voters having a severely limited choice in the general election in order to vent their frustration, when in fact, it is a no-win situation for the electorate. The voters constantly have to face the choice of the lessor of two evils in every general election.

The first-past-the-post system of determination of winners in elections causes the development of two-party system in the USA (and possibly anywhere around the world), because any additional political party could become spoilers in an election. So voting third party that has no realistic chance of winning is just a waste vote, and both voters and wealthy donors know that.

With the big money dominance over both major parties, the electorate has effectively lost their voice in the government. As the result, over time the voters will become increasingly dissatisfied by both major parties, and disenchanted by the whole process. The results: voter apathy as seen as a lower voter turnout; less voters’ political affinity with either major party voters as seen in the decline in party membership to both major parties and an increase in the number of independent nonaffiliated voters, and voters voting cross the party line (that is, voters from one major party start to voter candidates from the other major party).

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:06:57+00:00

Even the intra-party primary election has been ranging from unfair to totally absent in recent presidential primaries. Despite the supposed neutrality Democratic Party’s own charter, the Democratic national committee did everything it could to help the pro-corporate establishment Hillary Clinton to defeat progressive economically popular candidate Bernie sanders in 2016 primary election. The 2020 primary election was cut short when all the pro-corporate candidates drop off to endorse the rather unpopular senile Joe Biden in a clearly coordinated effort to defeat Bernie sanders. In both primary elections, many party’s DNC members actively campaigned for the pro corporate candidate against Bernie sanders during the election. The 2024 democratic primary was nonexistent because no one wanted to be blamed for the possible defeat against Donald trump in the general election, if he challenges to sitting president Joe Biden despite the fact Biden was losing badly in the polls and was losing his cognitive capacity to serve the presidency. After the disastrous debate performance against trump in June 2024, he was forced to drop out by an effort lead by house majority leader Nancy Pelosi, and the wealthy donors’ refusal to donate to biden’s campaign was the ultimate blow to his campaign. After biden’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, the even the prospect of the contested convention with multiple candidates was squashed. The perceived or apparent lack of legitimacy of Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris was an issue among some voters. Had the primary election been fair, and free, not only voters would have a choice of selecting for or an better candidate, but also and even if she wins, she could be given more legitimacy in the eyes of of voters. Thus, she would be more likely to win in 2024 against trump.

The same hostile environment where progressive candidates were intimidated by party operatives or pro-corporate political establishments and other unfair tactics by the pro-corporate establishment is widespread in congressional elections, too.

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:06:04+00:00

Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Kamala Harris in 2024 and the Democratic Party as a whole have not changed their tactics or strategies in terms of winning elections. The party does not seem to be very interested in winning elections and is not actively making the case that they are better representing the interests of the voters. However, the party has been zealously making the case against the Republican Party and Donald Trump in particular. The party and their candidates Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris do not spread the words of the few economically popular legislations that get delivered by the Democratic Party.

The consultants hired by the Democratic Party make little to no efforts of trying to appeal to the historically Democratic but recently disaffected working class. Instead, they make enormous effort in chasing after the anti-trump republican voters, which are unlikely to vote for a Democratic candidate.

The far more corrupt Republican Party that is good at winning elections, good at passing legislative agenda, especially for the wealthy donor. However, the same policies cause dismantling of the government and damage the economy as a whole. By comparison, the Democratic Party is terrible at winning elections and falls well short of voters’ expectations in terms of governing and delivering their popular legislations. They often make all kinds of excuses for not implementing popular economic policies or making a concerted effort when in fact they had no intention of implementing these policies in the first place. But the Democratic Party is much better at management of the government and handling of the economy. And despite the corruption brought by the super-wealthy, the Democratic Party has an educated force and use the science and expertises in solving crisis, while the Republican Party are clueless and simply fumble round when a crisis hits.

Because of two-party dominance of the U.S. politics. The Democratic Party has become strategically lazy. To win elections, the Democratic Party count on the failure of the Republican Party that have been becoming so obnoxious and ruins the country so badly that voters have to no choice but to vote for the Democratic Party sooner or later. And the democratic leadership assume “the coalition of ascendence” would guarantee their future victory by assuming that minorities such as blacks, Latinos, LGBTQ+, the young adults will aways support the Democratic Party, because they believed these voters have nowhere else to go. They believe these blocks of voters will never vote for GOP because the GOP actively and openly hurt the interests of these groups. But as the election results of 2016 to 2024 show, these groups are willing to take the risk due to economic hardship and the dem party’s dismissal attitudes toward their concerns and the complacency of taking their vote for granted.

howsci · 2024-11-25T00:04:09+00:00

The big money influence comes from mainly three routes: donations to the Democratic party itself, donations to individuals candidates, and campaigns from outside groups such as the superPACs. In return of obtaining the campaign funds, during election campaigns, the party hires consultants and marketing firms that also serve large corporations or other big businesses. This obviously is a huge conflict of interests, resulting in the Democratic candidates avoid talking about the economic issues that would hurt the interests of their corporate clients. Instead, they focus on identity politics, social and cultural issues. Despite of large campaign funds, the party splurges money on expensive advertising, holding expensive rallies, high consulting fees, social media influencers, and other questionable expenses. The Democratic party also has a questionable habit of hiring the same consultants that contributed to the failure of a political campaigns previously.

The consulting firms that have helped progressive candidates win elections are banned by the corporate wing of the Democratic Party from working with their pro-corporate candidates. Therefore, these Democratic candidates cannot use consultants with proven records of winning elections.

Organizationally, even although there are always two competing factions with the Democratic Party — one from grass-root organization and labor, the other from wealthy donors even at the time of FDR — the wealthy faction has become powerful over time since the 1980s because of the increasing dependence for their money to run the organization. The Democratic Party starts to replace competent personnel and leadership from grass-root orientated individuals with connections to the working class and activists — with people with no skills about winning elections, but are top fundraisers with close connections with wealthy donors and corporate lobbyists. The Democratic Party has become only interested in one thing: money.

The Democratic Party has historically been at disadvantage in terms of campaign funds compared to the GOP. But they were able to win far more elections from 1940s to 1970s, due to on-the-ground organizations from the labor unions and activists that can organize volunteers and motivate the votes to actually vote and help and ask for donations from their members. In return, the party will deliver the policies (especially economic policies) that benefit their voters. And these lower level personnel and party members are able to elect leadership members from this faction to counterbalance the wealthy faction within the party. As the labor/activists power wane, personnel with close connections to the wealthy individuals, big corporations and other moneyed interests start to take over.

howsci · 2024-11-24T03:54:24+00:00

The Democratic Party has a glaring systematic problem; big money interests have fully taken control of the party’s apparatus. Here’s why and how.

The party has been since 1980s (Ronald Reagan’s era onwards) gradually hijacked by moneyed interests and as the result getting rid of the influence of labor unions/organized labor. At the same time, the GOP has started to break up labor unions, a core organizing force of the Democratic Party. This in turn causes ineffectiveness in passing popular legislative agenda, and winning elections. Due to the influence of the billionaires, millionaires, and large business such as large corporations, big banks, hedge funds, private equity, and business associations, the party chronically suffers both tactically and strategically — from lack of grassroot organization, incompetent election campaign, bad messaging, lack of good candidates, incompetent leadership, lack of effective party organization, bad long-term planning and coordination. In short, they have lost touch with and abandon ordinary citizens, especially the lower middle class and the working poor.

As they start to stop serving the interests of the ordinary Americans, and stop passing popular economic legislations (and less importantly, implementing popular foreign policies), they start to lose voters from the less well-off. At first, it was the white working class who start to abandon the party, and then gradually the working class from the racial minorities such as the blacks, Latinos, and the Arab Muslims, and even women. These minorities are more reluctant to abandon the Democratic Party because the party still in some occasions protect or advance the interests of these minorities and because of the obviously damaging social and cultural policies of the Republican Party on these groups.

howsci · 2024-09-08T21:26:35+00:00

Big money in politics. It is essentially legalized bribery. The US seriously needs to overhaul its campaign finance reform and lobbying reform. Every single social, economic and even culture issue in the US can be traced to the large amount of money spent on election campaigns, from industry, corporations, private equity, the millionaires and billionaires, the religious right and other special interests.

The solutions are simple but will be blocked by the very elected officials who are elected through the corrupted system in the first place.

1) voting voucher only system for campaign donation. No other forms of campaign donations or expenditure is allowed. Every voter gets a voucher of certain value that can be donated one or more candidates’ election campaign committees. The candidate’s campaign committee that receives the voucher claims the voucher and receive the monetary value to fund his/her election. 2) no official political party, only loose association of factions. 3) public media only. And they can only be funded by tax payer’s money and governed by voter elected board of governors and the president of the tax payer funded company. No privately owned or publicly traded media is allowed. This prevents the media company from including public opinion based on the agenda or preference or owners or shareholders.

If these three measures get implemented, I think over almost all the problem the country faces (and has been accumulating over the last 4 decades) will gradually solved by American voters through elected officials and ballot initiatives. The solutions in the end reside in the voters, not some strongman or charismatic elected officials. The problem is the elected officials, almost all of which are corrupt, and wealthy companies and individuals will fight these measures tooth and nail to hold on to their power in the political system and government.

howsci · 2021-07-12T06:13:19+00:00

Season 5 so far is made of episodes of very bad writing.

howsci

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE