Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 02:26 PM) Hopefully without taking a side too strongly here...one thing seriously bothers me about this claim and the repetition of it. Let's say that the citizens of Gaza, through any variety of elected leadership, wanted to have any military resources whatsoever, to protect their territory and all the things that come with it. Where would they put it? This is one of the most densely populated areas in the world. It's almost physically impossible to have any sort of installation that isn't within the explosion radius of a large missile that isn't also within range of a school/hospital/day care facility, just because everything is within that range. If a missile installation is installed anywhere within Gaza, it by definition has to be using everyone around it as human shields because there is literally no open space. The alternative hypothetical...let's say that Hamas wanted to avoid putting children in harm's way so they declared their intention to develop a standard military base. Anyone think that would be allowed? So it's a catch-22. The only scenario that is acceptable is a completely disarmed population under the complete authority of Israel. Anything else is either prohibited or using human shields. So when I read this claim, I read it as claiming that these people should have no right to any sort of military or self defense of any kind, because that's what it translates to in a physical sense. We're talking about a terrorist organization holding weapons (and using weapons), not a peaceful sovereign government. Because of that I don't think they should have any military, at least not until they can show that they're not going to provoke violent conflicts again. Also, instead of wasting money on their military, why not try to do SOMETHING for the people there?

What's the connection to Tennessee? Didn't Paul play at Wake Forest his entire college career?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:19 AM) Thank you for travelling from yesterday to deliver that news. You're most welcome.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:43 AM) iPod Nanos had 1.5 inch screens when they first came out and I don't remember people telling me it was too small to use. The iPod Classic had a 2 inch screen and people watched videos on that... The Moto 360 has a 1.8 inch screen, FWIW. You didn't have an alternative in your pocket though. And the Nano was used to provide you two simple lines of text, not recipes, maps, pictures, etc.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) It's great for when you're in the car or can't use your hands. You can text someone just by saying "OK Google, text so and so". You can also use it for navigation (for when you walk or bike), get notifications at a glance, and there's apps that have special functions just for the watch (like a recipe app allowing you to view recipes step by step on the watch). It's an area that's yet to be fully developed and I think there's a use for it. It's still going to be a pain to use it for those things though. The screen is just not big enough for practical use IMO.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:28 AM) That's assuming people wear their watches 24/7, which they don't. You gotta take it off sometime. If getting a full charge is as easy as taking it off and putting it on a Qi wireless charger on your night-stand once every 2 days, then people have nothing to complain about. It's also the best looking smartwatch available by far. That does look nice, but I still don't get the need for a smartwatch. Reach into your pocket and pull out your phone. It's not that far away...

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:22 AM) No speed is ever overkill. 100 mbps can get you around 13 MB/s. You can download a 1 GB file in about a minute and a half. I don't see how you can complain about faster download speeds... For the 2% of the population that downloads files that big, maybe. But even then, is it worth an extra $50/month to gain like 5 minutes of wait time to download a big file? I'm not saying that at some point that kind of speed will be nice to have. But right now? No way, not for the additional cost. I have 24MB/s and it's more than enough for downloading big files, streaming movies, playing games, etc.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Aug 6, 2014 -> 10:21 AM) 4K could take off with streaming, as in the future most of these bandwidth limitations and restrictions will eventually go away, but with 4k (and soon 8k?) storage is more of an issue, as each movie (without extras, languages, etc.) is probably around 150 gigs. But even then, it would be limited (at least for the foreseeable future) to people living where huge bandwidth is available. As seen here: http://gizmodo.com/5914426/the-first-cinem...ly-breathtaking It'll fail like 3D has failed. People will have to upgrade their tv's/monitors and networks will have to film/broadcast in 4k and neither will be willing to do that in the numbers that a change would require. This is especially true if the technology of even better resolution is just down the road.

100 mbps seems like overkill. What kind of content would require that speed?

Love deal sounds like it's done and they're just waiting to make it official.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 02:44 PM) Thomas down to 6, Illini still in it. Evans cutting list tomorrow, and there's this: "I’m told that there will be a surprise omission on Wednesday morning—with a team who has been rumored to be a big-time contender left out." Although supposedly he'll have a date for Illinois' official today. Did you read that Derek Piper guys' article?

Also, this is what scares me: http://gawker.com/israel-pulls-all-troops-...gaza-1616233024 Look at the comments. Zero understanding. "Oppressor" is always worse than "oppressed" without regard to historical context.

We'll never know, but I wonder how that 1948 plan really would have worked. Jerusalem as an "internationally controlled" city? How does that even being to work?

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 12:18 PM) What's wrong is that it starts and stops the conversation with Palestine hates Israel because Israel. It does not discuss the settlement issue. It does not address the rampant unemployment in Gaza, or any of the reasons that the Palestinians might have allowed a terrorist organization like Hamas to come into being. And it does not distinguish between Hamas and Palestinians that want peace. It's an overly broad, one-sided description of the conflict. There are no shortage of Palestinians living peacefully as Israeli citizens (per Wikipedia, around 21% of Israel's population are of Arab descent). What is the difference between those Palestinians and the ones in Gaza? Israel has a real, functioning economy and is a fairly prosperous place. The civilians that die in Gaza are not Hamas. It's reprehensible that Hamas uses civilians as shields. The point of the difference in civilian deaths is that it illustrates that these conflicts disproportionately impact the innocents in Gaza vs. anyone else. Hamas will survive this conflict (and probably grow stronger given the conditions in Gaza). Iron Dome will make Israeli civilian casualties very, very low. And the cycle will continue. It's a tragic situation on both sides. 70 years of action have proven that this is 100% true though. Israel does not deny that Palestinians should have their own state and have offered land many times in an attempt at peace. Palestinians have done the opposite. Palestinians could be controlling the majority of modern day Israel had they taken the UN deal, but they decided they wanted it all instead and attacked. They did the same thing (with other Arab-country support) in the 60's and lost again. Yes, it's wrong to say "they" as if 100% of the population thinks that way, but they did just vote in Hamas so at least the majority of them think this way. Also, I find it interesting that you're almost blaming Israel for the plight of the Palestinians - which I sort of can see - but we have to keep in mind they brought it on themselves and they continue to do so. They're being "occupied" because they can't be trusted. And what the world appears to be asking is for Israel to just ignore that very real threat and play nice when decades of action have proven that's not what the Palestinians want.

I just watched the video. Clearly an overreaction from Bennett. Pretty impressive though that Fuller was able to whip Bennett down like that. Didn't seem like he did much of anything with his arms there.

I agree with you. It's a very tough position for Israel to be in. I'm not Jewish and have no dog in this fight, but I see where they are coming from. They're surrounded by an enemy who wants them destroyed and has tried to destroy them in the past.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Aug 5, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) First of all Dennis Prager is a bigot who hates Muslims. Even the Anti-Defamation League has called him out on it. There is a ton of garbage in this video that is wrong and spun to make Israel the good guys and Palestinians the evil people. Second you should never get all your info on this situation from a 5 minute video. I don't care if Dennis Prager made it or Noam Chomsky. What Jenks mentioned in his second paragraph is Ethnic cleansing. Which I'm against. No, it's displacement, which is also bad, but looking at the history I wouldn't blame Israel for doing it. They're surrounded by people who don't recognize them as a legitimate state and want them annihilated. And yet you want them to play nice with those people? Why?

So, I get that the sensationalized media coverage is going over the top in an attempt to get readers to "fear read," and I get that we go through this sort of news cycle every year or so with some disease/virus that's going to cause a massive pandemic, but can someone explain why on Earth we're voluntarily bringing the Ebola virus to the United States? We're sending/have sent an incredibly advanced and expensive plane to pick up 2 people with the virus in order to bring them back here to treat/test them? Why not take them to some secluded place outside of the US that's not in the Atlanta area full of millions of people?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 11:15 PM) Good summary. It's a little biased (doesn't really acknowledge the settling issues), but really it comes down to this: the Palestinians gambled and lost, twice. And after the 2nd war in the 60's, and after many decades of dealing with people who don't acknowledge their right to exist and actively promote and incite violence to "destroy" them, Israel finally decided that it had enough of it. And it moved to not only defend itself from future attacks, but occupy Palestinian territory to prevent war #3. IMO they're entirely within their right to do it. Really, with all the crap they've had to deal with, i'm not sure why Israel hasn't just taken over Gaza and the West Bank and forced those people to Syria, Jordan or Egypt. Especially after Egypt signed that peace pact in the 80's. But I guess now Egypt's all f***ed up and who knows how that'll play out. In a way the civil war in Syria is delaying any involvement there, but with the rise of extremist Muslims on all sides of Israel, war #3 could be on the horizon. I hope we and the rest of the civilized world continue to back Israel.

22 Jump Street was hilarious. Maybe not as good as the first, but close. The dinner scene with Ice Cube had me near tears.

This is pretty funny: http://www.csnne.com/page/exclusive-im-com...an-scalabrine-0

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 01:34 PM) The massive disparity in civilian deaths between the two sides certainly leads to a more nuanced review of the conflict than Israel good, Palestine bad. You can certainly be pro-Israel, pro-Israel's right to peace and prosperity, anti-Hamas, and still condemn certain actions of Israel. Sure, but the counter is what else is Israel supposed to do? Hamas purposefully puts their weapons and people in large public places like schools and hospitals SPECIFICALLY so that when Israel knocks them out they can tell the world how awful Israel is. And the world eats that crap up and they forget Hamas started the whole thing by kidnapping and killing Israeli citizens and/or launching rockets. edit: and the disproportionate numbers just comes down to military strength and sophistication. It's getting mad at the 10 year old for being more physical than the 4 year old. Hamas (and Palestinians who support Hamas) picked the wrong fight and they're hoping the world takes pity on them. If Hamas could they'd go back to their car/bus bombing days. But security is too good for that now.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Aug 4, 2014 -> 01:20 PM) Sounds like he landed on his right shoulder and that's what he was holding coming off the field. Fractured clavicle.

Supposedly that Dalton contract only has 17 million guaranteed. Not much risk there for the Bengals.