LOL *NSFW* *The new Demote thread*

To be fair her immune system will bat it off easier than his.

 

I know senators are dumbasses but he didn't actually say that, did he?

 

Spoiler: What he actually said

Before I ask my questions, I am going to read a paragraph from Dr. Apt’s statement or paper that he wrote because we are here debating a renewable energy standard because we think that there is a theory that manmade emissions, primarily from fossil fuels like coal, which reduce amounts of CO2, are causing climate change, i.e., the temperature to rise, and one of the solutions being proposed is an RES that is going to rely fairly heavily on wind power, which obviously doesn’t create CO2.

I am going to read a paragraph which is if true very ironic, and this is from Dr. Apt’s paper and I quote: “Wind energy is a finite resource. At large scale, slowing down the wind by using its energy to turn turbines has environmental consequences. A group of researchers at Princeton University,” which is in New Jersey, parenthetically “found that wind farms may change the mixing of air near the surface, drying the soil near the site. At planetary scales, David Keith, who was then at Carnegie Mellon, and coworkers found that if wind supplied 10 percent of expected global electricity demand in 2100, which is a number of years off, the resulting change in the earth’s atmospheric energy might cause some regions of the world to experience temperature change of approximately 1 degree Centigrade,” which I think is about 1-1/2 degrees or 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit.

Now, wind is God’s way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it is hotter to areas where it is cooler. That is what wind is. Wouldn’t it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now, I am not saying that is going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive
scale — I mean, it does make some sense. You stop something. You can’t transfer that heat and the heat goes up. It is just something to think about.

It's more long winded and only slightly less insulting to the intelligence of anyone who heard it. But then Rep Barton is pretty much the archetypal Texas Republican and the guy who opposed BP being made to pay for the Deep Water Horizon disaster in every way he could think of.

 

Does it have the correct connector for their £5000+ power cable?
https://www.chord.co.uk/product/chordmusic-power-cable/

 

When I view that it floats off the page ... a maglev power chord? Bit pricey, even though it flies.

 

I'm generally quite charitable. I generally like to think that when I disagree with someone, or someone is flat out wrong, the other person genuinely believe that what they're saying is correct. Most anti-vaxxers for example genuinely believe that they are doing the best thing for their children. They're wrong, but that doesn't make them "bad" people.

Except when it comes to "audiophile" companies like Chord. At this point I find it incredibly hard to believe that these people are genuinely not aware that just in the business of fleecing people.

A network packet is a network packet; it doesn't matter whether it's carrying email, social media, music, or donkey porn. There's a good argument for spending money on quality kit whenever analogue signals are involved - speakers, DACs, amplifiers, etc. But £500 on a network switch that "filters digital audio" is obscene; it's utterly and demonstrably false advertising and I don't know why they can't be taken to a ****ing criminal court for it.

And if you're happy spending £5000 on a power cable then you abso-****ing-lutely deserve to be parted from every single penny that these shysters will take from you.

EDIT: No, no, no... They cannot be seriously ****ing claiming, with a straight face, that a £4000 network cable is better for music: https://www.chord.co.uk/product/chordmusic-streaming-cable/. No, there's no way in hell I will believe that ANYONE genuinely thinks that a £4000 network cable is better than a £5 network cable. No, they damn well know they're full of **** and they simply don't care.

 

Because wealthy saps lap this kind of thing up and seem to genuinely believe it makes their, super expensive, system better. Oh, and just for giggles, here's another example of how ridiculous the high-end hifi market can be: https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/audioquest-wel-signature-speaker-cable-per-terminated-pair.html

 

If they’ve been made aware of that pricing, and they don’t change it to it’s real price, no one should ever buy anything at chord.co.uk

I’m sure it’s a mistake, right?

 

If you look at my link above, you'll see that a 5 metre pair of those speaker cables come in at £54,414.98! £500 is nothing to people who buy high-end hifi. That you could buy something like a good, used Aston Martin, for the price of those cables just passes-by such people.

 

The wealthy saps with money to burn aren't the problem. I've got no problem with what people want to spend their money on. I just spent £110 on a Lego model that'll sit in a glass case and rarely be touched, and £370 on a PS4 so I can play one game - I've got no right to be angry about what people spend their money on.

The people lying to the wealthy saps and selling them criminally overpriced widgets are the problem.

 

They get away with it because the wealthy saps choose to believe them though. Some of the blame must also reside with the hifi review sites, eg WhatHiFi, that tell people how all these things "improve" the sound.

 

I love this. I've been re-reading the Dune books in anticipation of Denis Villeneuve's new adaptation.

 

Spotted in London...







...but my favourite is this one...

 

Meanwhile in USA

 

To be fair all of those people may very easily been doing those things for quite some time and it's just coincided with the current hysteria.

 

Meanwhile in Australia

Man tasered over toilet paper fight