LedRush
-
Posts
29331 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by LedRush
-
-
It is funny and sad (worthy of a facepalm) that you use unscientific fear mongering to argue that something isn’t unscientific fear mongering. The virus infects whatever it can. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t see an old person and a young one and decide to go after the old, just as it doesn’t attempt to go after an old person, discover that it is vaccinated, and then go after whatever is left. Children are less likely to be infected than adults. That is a fact. Children are less likely to have serious repercussions from the virus than adults. That is a fact. Children are less at risk to the coronavirus than the ordinary flu. That is a fact.
You can argue for psychological and physical abuse of children to accommodate your own fear, but that says more about you than the scientific facts about the virus.
I could say the same about you, I found quotes from medical doctors commenting on how the virus is now more contagious and that children are now at a greater risk of being infected yet you ignore that. I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus. Those states referred to in my comment are showing a change in the risk for children due to the new strains being more highly contagious. It seems those facts don't fit with your view so you waved them away.
”that those being hospitalized are getting younger because the virus looks for suitable hosts in order to reproduce. As more adults get vaccinated, the virus has fewer places to go, so it will seek out hosts that have no protections -- like children.”
This is the definition of unscientific fear mongering.
“I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus.” Of course not, because of your unscientific fear mongering you support the physical and emotional abuse of children. Interestingly, this is an issue which disproportionately disadvantages students of color.
:facepalm: Really?
I hear you. I'm sick of this "I have Google at my fingertips. Therefore, I know more than scientists and experts because I say so" entitlement and attitude. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool before opening mouth and removing all doubt.
My goodness this is both hilarious and sad. There has been a lot of research on the topic, and most scientists and doctors agree. Are you suggesting that Rhyta’s theory of the sentient virus which chooses it’s victims and, as such, it will be looking for defenseless children is valid? Are you suggesting that children aren’t at less risk to covid than adults? Or that even when kids do get covid they don’t have less severe reactions (as a group, not individually, obviously)?
What science are you reading? I can give you some sources. A good friend is a Phd biochemist working at the NIH on Covid work. Yes, the virus is definitely out there looking for hosts.If a number of adults are not good hosts due to vaccination and/or exposure the numbers may well increase in children, no one knows.
I would love to see the scientific papers which determine that covid is the first sentient virus discovered by humans, but let’s just chalk that up to overly loose language and move past it (though it does seem odd that people are continuing to use that loose and inaccurate language about a virus).
Infection is a function of exposure to the virus. With more adults already having had the virus or gotten vaccinated, children’s exposure to the virus decreases. That’s the whole point of herd immunity occurring at a number less than 100%. This is really, really basic stuff, and it’s disheartening to see that people don’t understand it.
-
1618366872[/url'>' post='4905520']1618309152[/url'>' post='4905203']1618288332[/url'>' post='4905177']1618261860[/url'>' post='4905065']1618189701[/url'>' post='4904907']1618146210[/url'>' post='4904762']
It is funny and sad (worthy of a facepalm) that you use unscientific fear mongering to argue that something isn’t unscientific fear mongering. The virus infects whatever it can. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t see an old person and a young one and decide to go after the old, just as it doesn’t attempt to go after an old person, discover that it is vaccinated, and then go after whatever is left. Children are less likely to be infected than adults. That is a fact. Children are less likely to have serious repercussions from the virus than adults. That is a fact. Children are less at risk to the coronavirus than the ordinary flu. That is a fact.
You can argue for psychological and physical abuse of children to accommodate your own fear, but that says more about you than the scientific facts about the virus.
I could say the same about you, I found quotes from medical doctors commenting on how the virus is now more contagious and that children are now at a greater risk of being infected yet you ignore that. I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus. Those states referred to in my comment are showing a change in the risk for children due to the new strains being more highly contagious. It seems those facts don't fit with your view so you waved them away.
”that those being hospitalized are getting younger because the virus looks for suitable hosts in order to reproduce. As more adults get vaccinated, the virus has fewer places to go, so it will seek out hosts that have no protections -- like children.”
This is the definition of unscientific fear mongering.
“I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus.” Of course not, because of your unscientific fear mongering you support the physical and emotional abuse of children. Interestingly, this is an issue which disproportionately disadvantages students of color.
I hear you. I'm sick of this "I have Google at my fingertips. Therefore, I know more than scientists and experts because I say so" entitlement and attitude. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool before opening mouth and removing all doubt.
My goodness this is both hilarious and sad. There has been a lot of research on the topic, and most scientists and doctors agree. Are you suggesting that Rhyta’s theory of the sentient virus which chooses it’s victims and, as such, it will be looking for defenseless children is valid? Are you suggesting that children aren’t at less risk to covid than adults? Or that even when kids do get covid they don’t have less severe reactions (as a group, not individually, obviously)?
As you are being deliberately ignorant, it is not my theory, the quotes I listed earlier in the thread are from medical people, I didn't link to the articles but they are out there if one cared to check. You just want to make fun of me and act superior, have a party :16ton:
So when you are quoting other people in your argument against my position, you don’t actually believe what you are quoting? Why quote it then? The position is unscientific and absurd on its face. It goes against everything we’ve learned since the inception of germ-based theory over 100 years ago. And you still don’t acknowledge the incontrovertible facts that covid doesn’t infect children as much as adults, doesn’t affect children as negatively as adults, and isn’t nearly as dangerous to children as the ordinary flu.
-
Anyone have a guess as to how many people under 18 have died of (or probably with) COVID in the US since the start of the epidemic, according to the CDC?
No googling, please.
At the beginning of last summer is was something like 6 people under the age of 6, and maybe about 100 under the age of 18. If that rate held, it should be something like 500, though I suspect we got better at dealing with it since the early days. Also, there were 2-5 times as many deaths due to flu and pneumonia (I’m not sure why they grouped those 2 together) than covid.
I'll wait to get a few more guesses till I post the number (and the link).
I just looked it up. Don’t worry folks, I got it wrong by a significant amount. Guess away!
Some of the numbers in there really surprised me, and I’ve tried to keep up with this stuff.
-
1
-
-
Anyone have a guess as to how many people under 18 have died of (or probably with) COVID in the US since the start of the epidemic, according to the CDC?
No googling, please.
At the beginning of last summer is was something like 6 people under the age of 6, and maybe about 100 under the age of 18. If that rate held, it should be something like 500, though I suspect we got better at dealing with it since the early days. Also, there were 2-5 times as many deaths due to flu and pneumonia (I’m not sure why they grouped those 2 together) than covid.
-
I just wanted to say that ILSnowdog sucks.
And happy belated.
-
It is funny and sad (worthy of a facepalm) that you use unscientific fear mongering to argue that something isn’t unscientific fear mongering. The virus infects whatever it can. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t see an old person and a young one and decide to go after the old, just as it doesn’t attempt to go after an old person, discover that it is vaccinated, and then go after whatever is left. Children are less likely to be infected than adults. That is a fact. Children are less likely to have serious repercussions from the virus than adults. That is a fact. Children are less at risk to the coronavirus than the ordinary flu. That is a fact.
You can argue for psychological and physical abuse of children to accommodate your own fear, but that says more about you than the scientific facts about the virus.
I could say the same about you, I found quotes from medical doctors commenting on how the virus is now more contagious and that children are now at a greater risk of being infected yet you ignore that. I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus. Those states referred to in my comment are showing a change in the risk for children due to the new strains being more highly contagious. It seems those facts don't fit with your view so you waved them away.
”that those being hospitalized are getting younger because the virus looks for suitable hosts in order to reproduce. As more adults get vaccinated, the virus has fewer places to go, so it will seek out hosts that have no protections -- like children.”
This is the definition of unscientific fear mongering.
“I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus.” Of course not, because of your unscientific fear mongering you support the physical and emotional abuse of children. Interestingly, this is an issue which disproportionately disadvantages students of color.
:facepalm: Really?
I hear you. I'm sick of this "I have Google at my fingertips. Therefore, I know more than scientists and experts because I say so" entitlement and attitude. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool before opening mouth and removing all doubt.
My goodness this is both hilarious and sad. There has been a lot of research on the topic, and most scientists and doctors agree. Are you suggesting that Rhyta’s theory of the sentient virus which chooses it’s victims and, as such, it will be looking for defenseless children is valid? Are you suggesting that children aren’t at less risk to covid than adults? Or that even when kids do get covid they don’t have less severe reactions (as a group, not individually, obviously)?
-
2
-
-
It is funny and sad (worthy of a facepalm) that you use unscientific fear mongering to argue that something isn’t unscientific fear mongering. The virus infects whatever it can. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t see an old person and a young one and decide to go after the old, just as it doesn’t attempt to go after an old person, discover that it is vaccinated, and then go after whatever is left. Children are less likely to be infected than adults. That is a fact. Children are less likely to have serious repercussions from the virus than adults. That is a fact. Children are less at risk to the coronavirus than the ordinary flu. That is a fact.
You can argue for psychological and physical abuse of children to accommodate your own fear, but that says more about you than the scientific facts about the virus.
I could say the same about you, I found quotes from medical doctors commenting on how the virus is now more contagious and that children are now at a greater risk of being infected yet you ignore that. I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus. Those states referred to in my comment are showing a change in the risk for children due to the new strains being more highly contagious. It seems those facts don't fit with your view so you waved them away.
”that those being hospitalized are getting younger because the virus looks for suitable hosts in order to reproduce. As more adults get vaccinated, the virus has fewer places to go, so it will seek out hosts that have no protections -- like children.”
This is the definition of unscientific fear mongering.
“I am not arguing for the return of children to school by saying they are less likely to be at risk for getting the virus.” Of course not, because of your unscientific fear mongering you support the physical and emotional abuse of children. Interestingly, this is an issue which disproportionately disadvantages students of color.
-
1617956211[/url'>' post='4904221']1617814010[/url'>' post='4903886']1617692590[/url'>' post='4903672']1617243319[/url'>' post='4902383']1616277426[/url'>' post='4899677']1616270774[/url'>' post='4899643']1616264190[/url'>' post='4899631']
Meanwhile, blue state death rates continue to give others heartache.
I dunno, of the top 17 which is 1/3 of the 50 states and Puerto Rico, I believe 9 are red states.
8 of the 10 states/territories with the lowest rates of death are also blue states.
I don't give a rat's ass about what a state's stupid "color" is.
I care about dysfunctional, irresponsible parents passing their dysfunction onto their children and putting their health at risk, all because of their juvenile partisan agendas.
I agree with this completely. All the available evidence shows that for young children, the risk of Covid is significantly lower than the risk of the normal flu (in the range of 1-3 times less dangerous depending on the age). Yet you have parents who are teaching their kids hysterical fear in the face of what, to the kids, is essentially a non-factor. Parents, and society as a whole, have a responsibility to protect children physically and emotionally. What we’ve seen is that partisan stupidity, anti-science beliefs, and irrational fear have caused many to sacrifice children’s psychological, intellectual, and physical development by closing schools, wrapping their kids up like they’re in a The Stand, and some even physically distancing themselves from their own kids if the kids have had exposure to the virus. What some have decided to do is just a form of child abuse.
That isn’t to say the children don’t need to take any precautions: when I came back to the states to visit my parents for Christmas the kids masked up and socially distanced. Even though young children are significantly less likely to either contract or to pass on the virus than teens or adults, we planned to stay with my elderly parents and there was no need to put them at additional risk (the virus is significantly more dangerous than the flu for their age group). But there is a big difference between teaching kids to take some precautions in certain circumstances where they could increase the risk to others and the insanity which has gripped many in the US for the last year.
Things are improving with so many getting vaccinated but the trope that children are not at risk is now being revised. With the influx of the new strains, ones that are much more contagious, children are now at a greater risk of contracting the virus. The U.K. variant is spreading in Minnesota, 750 cases reported in the last two weeks. Nothing is guaranteed with these mutations. Being cautious is being smart.
1617692590[/url'>' post='4903672']1617243319[/url'>' post='4902383']1616277426[/url'>' post='4899677']1616270774[/url'>' post='4899643']1616264190[/url'>' post='4899631']Meanwhile, blue state death rates continue to give others heartache.
I dunno, of the top 17 which is 1/3 of the 50 states and Puerto Rico, I believe 9 are red states.
8 of the 10 states/territories with the lowest rates of death are also blue states.
I don't give a rat's ass about what a state's stupid "color" is.
I care about dysfunctional, irresponsible parents passing their dysfunction onto their children and putting their health at risk, all because of their juvenile partisan agendas.
I agree with this completely. All the available evidence shows that for young children, the risk of Covid is significantly lower than the risk of the normal flu (in the range of 1-3 times less dangerous depending on the age). Yet you have parents who are teaching their kids hysterical fear in the face of what, to the kids, is essentially a non-factor. Parents, and society as a whole, have a responsibility to protect children physically and emotionally. What we’ve seen is that partisan stupidity, anti-science beliefs, and irrational fear have caused many to sacrifice children’s psychological, intellectual, and physical development by closing schools, wrapping their kids up like they’re in a The Stand, and some even physically distancing themselves from their own kids if the kids have had exposure to the virus. What some have decided to do is just a form of child abuse.
That isn’t to say the children don’t need to take any precautions: when I came back to the states to visit my parents for Christmas the kids masked up and socially distanced. Even though young children are significantly less likely to either contract or to pass on the virus than teens or adults, we planned to stay with my elderly parents and there was no need to put them at additional risk (the virus is significantly more dangerous than the flu for their age group). But there is a big difference between teaching kids to take some precautions in certain circumstances where they could increase the risk to others and the insanity which has gripped many in the US for the last year.
Things are improving with so many getting vaccinated but the trope that children are not at risk is now being revised. With the influx of the new strains, ones that are much more contagious, children are now at a greater risk of contracting the virus. The U.K. variant is spreading in Minnesota, 750 cases reported in the last two weeks. Nothing is guaranteed with these mutations. Being cautious is being smart.
I’ve never heard the trope that children are not at risk. What I’ve read is the scientific evidence that they are less likely to contract the disease than adults, less likely to pass on the disease than adults, less likely to have bad outcomes from the disease than adults, and that the disease is less dangerous for them than the flu. Even with the new variants, all this seems still to be true with the available evidence. Of course, you should be cautious when the danger is warranted (i.e., the kids may come in contact with high risk people). But many Americans aren’t merely being cautious, they are putting their kids’ mental and physical health at risk based on unscientific fear mongering.
It isn't unscientific fear mongering. Here's a few recent headlines
Massachusetts data shows nearly 7,000 COVID cases in children, teens in past 2 weeks ..cases of the contagious respiratory disease is reported as increasing in younger adults and children in many states as the country as a whole eases restrictions put in place to help stop transmission of the virus behind the pandemic that has killed more than 559,000 Americans.
While children are out and about, playing sports and going to school after having being indoors for nearly a year, more and more are getting exposed to COVID-19 and getting sick enough to be hospitalized. While adults are getting vaccinated, there are no protections for children...
Michigan Covid Hospitalizations number at 3K.. are younger than 60..that those being hospitalized are getting younger because the virus looks for suitable hosts in order to reproduce. As more adults get vaccinated, the virus has fewer places to go, so it will seek out hosts that have no protections -- like children.
With 1,046 new cases reported on Thursday, the first time since Feb. 11 that the daily count topped 1,000, the seven-day average for new infections has risen to 733. The daily average on March 23 was 387.
“There are still a lot of vulnerable people at high risk,” Westergaard said. Adding to the risk, he said, are children who this week have the highest numbers of infection as in-person school resumes and extra-curricular activities activities ramp up.
There is no doubt that children are being severely impacted by the disruption in their schooling. But rushing to get them all back in school as if everything is fine is setting up those children for exposure to the more highly contagious variants. We do so at our peril.
It is funny and sad (worthy of a facepalm) that you use unscientific fear mongering to argue that something isn’t unscientific fear mongering. The virus infects whatever it can. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t see an old person and a young one and decide to go after the old, just as it doesn’t attempt to go after an old person, discover that it is vaccinated, and then go after whatever is left. Children are less likely to be infected than adults. That is a fact. Children are less likely to have serious repercussions from the virus than adults. That is a fact. Children are less at risk to the coronavirus than the ordinary flu. That is a fact.
You can argue for psychological and physical abuse of children to accommodate your own fear, but that says more about you than the scientific facts about the virus.
-
1
-
-
Meanwhile, blue state death rates continue to give others heartache.March 6th, 2021. At the Idaho Capitol Building, in Boise, Idaho
In what can only be described as delicious irony, the legislature of the state of Idaho is shutting down at least until April 6th because of a Covid outbreak.
Irony so sweet, it’s giving me a toothache!
I dunno, of the top 17 which is 1/3 of the 50 states and Puerto Rico, I believe 9 are red states.
8 of the 10 states/territories with the lowest rates of death are also blue states.
"Tell your statistics to shut up".
Joe Schulz to Jim Bouton, 1969
I don't give a rat's ass about what a state's stupid "color" is.
I care about dysfunctional, irresponsible parents passing their dysfunction onto their children and putting their health at risk, all because of their juvenile partisan agendas.
I agree with this completely. All the available evidence shows that for young children, the risk of Covid is significantly lower than the risk of the normal flu (in the range of 1-3 times less dangerous depending on the age). Yet you have parents who are teaching their kids hysterical fear in the face of what, to the kids, is essentially a non-factor. Parents, and society as a whole, have a responsibility to protect children physically and emotionally. What we’ve seen is that partisan stupidity, anti-science beliefs, and irrational fear have caused many to sacrifice children’s psychological, intellectual, and physical development by closing schools, wrapping their kids up like they’re in a The Stand, and some even physically distancing themselves from their own kids if the kids have had exposure to the virus. What some have decided to do is just a form of child abuse.
That isn’t to say the children don’t need to take any precautions: when I came back to the states to visit my parents for Christmas the kids masked up and socially distanced. Even though young children are significantly less likely to either contract or to pass on the virus than teens or adults, we planned to stay with my elderly parents and there was no need to put them at additional risk (the virus is significantly more dangerous than the flu for their age group). But there is a big difference between teaching kids to take some precautions in certain circumstances where they could increase the risk to others and the insanity which has gripped many in the US for the last year.
Things are improving with so many getting vaccinated but the trope that children are not at risk is now being revised. With the influx of the new strains, ones that are much more contagious, children are now at a greater risk of contracting the virus. The U.K. variant is spreading in Minnesota, 750 cases reported in the last two weeks. Nothing is guaranteed with these mutations. Being cautious is being smart.
Meanwhile, blue state death rates continue to give others heartache.March 6th, 2021. At the Idaho Capitol Building, in Boise, Idaho
In what can only be described as delicious irony, the legislature of the state of Idaho is shutting down at least until April 6th because of a Covid outbreak.
Irony so sweet, it’s giving me a toothache!
I dunno, of the top 17 which is 1/3 of the 50 states and Puerto Rico, I believe 9 are red states.
8 of the 10 states/territories with the lowest rates of death are also blue states.
"Tell your statistics to shut up".
Joe Schulz to Jim Bouton, 1969
I don't give a rat's ass about what a state's stupid "color" is.
I care about dysfunctional, irresponsible parents passing their dysfunction onto their children and putting their health at risk, all because of their juvenile partisan agendas.
I agree with this completely. All the available evidence shows that for young children, the risk of Covid is significantly lower than the risk of the normal flu (in the range of 1-3 times less dangerous depending on the age). Yet you have parents who are teaching their kids hysterical fear in the face of what, to the kids, is essentially a non-factor. Parents, and society as a whole, have a responsibility to protect children physically and emotionally. What we’ve seen is that partisan stupidity, anti-science beliefs, and irrational fear have caused many to sacrifice children’s psychological, intellectual, and physical development by closing schools, wrapping their kids up like they’re in a The Stand, and some even physically distancing themselves from their own kids if the kids have had exposure to the virus. What some have decided to do is just a form of child abuse.
That isn’t to say the children don’t need to take any precautions: when I came back to the states to visit my parents for Christmas the kids masked up and socially distanced. Even though young children are significantly less likely to either contract or to pass on the virus than teens or adults, we planned to stay with my elderly parents and there was no need to put them at additional risk (the virus is significantly more dangerous than the flu for their age group). But there is a big difference between teaching kids to take some precautions in certain circumstances where they could increase the risk to others and the insanity which has gripped many in the US for the last year.
Things are improving with so many getting vaccinated but the trope that children are not at risk is now being revised. With the influx of the new strains, ones that are much more contagious, children are now at a greater risk of contracting the virus. The U.K. variant is spreading in Minnesota, 750 cases reported in the last two weeks. Nothing is guaranteed with these mutations. Being cautious is being smart.
I’ve never heard the trope that children are not at risk. What I’ve read is the scientific evidence that they are less likely to contract the disease than adults, less likely to pass on the disease than adults, less likely to have bad outcomes from the disease than adults, and that the disease is less dangerous for them than the flu. Even with the new variants, all this seems still to be true with the available evidence. Of course, you should be cautious when the danger is warranted (i.e., the kids may come in contact with high risk people). But many Americans aren’t merely being cautious, they are putting their kids’ mental and physical health at risk based on unscientific fear mongering.
-
1
-
-
Meanwhile, blue state death rates continue to give others heartache.March 6th, 2021. At the Idaho Capitol Building, in Boise, Idaho
In what can only be described as delicious irony, the legislature of the state of Idaho is shutting down at least until April 6th because of a Covid outbreak.
Irony so sweet, it’s giving me a toothache!
I dunno, of the top 17 which is 1/3 of the 50 states and Puerto Rico, I believe 9 are red states.
8 of the 10 states/territories with the lowest rates of death are also blue states.
"Tell your statistics to shut up".
Joe Schulz to Jim Bouton, 1969
I don't give a rat's ass about what a state's stupid "color" is.
I care about dysfunctional, irresponsible parents passing their dysfunction onto their children and putting their health at risk, all because of their juvenile partisan agendas.
I agree with this completely. All the available evidence shows that for young children, the risk of Covid is significantly lower than the risk of the normal flu (in the range of 1-3 times less dangerous depending on the age). Yet you have parents who are teaching their kids hysterical fear in the face of what, to the kids, is essentially a non-factor. Parents, and society as a whole, have a responsibility to protect children physically and emotionally. What we’ve seen is that partisan stupidity, anti-science beliefs, and irrational fear have caused many to sacrifice children’s psychological, intellectual, and physical development by closing schools, wrapping their kids up like they’re in a The Stand, and some even physically distancing themselves from their own kids if the kids have had exposure to the virus. What some have decided to do is just a form of child abuse.
That isn’t to say the children don’t need to take any precautions: when I came back to the states to visit my parents for Christmas the kids masked up and socially distanced. Even though young children are significantly less likely to either contract or to pass on the virus than teens or adults, we planned to stay with my elderly parents and there was no need to put them at additional risk (the virus is significantly more dangerous than the flu for their age group). But there is a big difference between teaching kids to take some precautions in certain circumstances where they could increase the risk to others and the insanity which has gripped many in the US for the last year.
-
3
-
-
A cynic might say the whole trend is simply making a profit off pretending to like people's favorite songs. And he wouldn't be far off.I think that the popular craze of "reaction" videos ( some of which I really, really enjoy) has morphed into, or at least created a subset of "expert" reactions...and a lot of times I can't help but feel I'm being grifted while I watch. There are a few "drum experts" or "drum teachers" reacting to Neil Peart solos on youtube...and a lot of it is just someone saying "this guy's insane!" It's like all they want is someone like me, a fan of Neil's, to "like" their video and say "totally, dude - he's the greatest ever!" But Peart was not "insane", and any real expert on the instrument would understand everything he is doing - while also being aware that he is doing it at a high level of skill.
I watched classical composer guy's reaction to Xanadu, and found it, relative to him being a composer, really short on insight and expertise. As stated elsewhere in this thread, I don't think Rush's chord progressions are what make them a unique band at all. Having some guy comment on a verse being in E (like, THE most standard chord in rock music) and then moving to D for a chorus just has very little value, in my opinion. And, I wouldn't knock a non-musician for this whatsoever, but when he was saying there was a section of Xanadu that was in 7 because he got confused by the "push" in that riff... well, that really made it hard for me to listen to anything else he had to say...
He'd be spot-on in most cases. This is frequently all about building up a big enough subscriber base to monetize one's channel.
Well, his political videos have very few views and seem to garner equal hate and praise. His reaction views are much more popular, and they seem to revolve around a specific type of music and a few artists.
-
1615847024[/url'>' post='4898371']
-
3
-
-
Have a cigar and a drink and enjoy the relentless passage of time representing creeping death while listening to Hold Your Fire, which also represents creeping death.
(I actually love HYF...don’t tell LABT.)
-
3
-
-
I just thought of this while opening a WebEx meeting...on my Mac I’ve found that WebEx works much better if you download and install the application rather than use it in a web browser.
-
1
-
-
Interesting. I’ve done PowerPoint presentations on my Mac with the Mac OS version of PowerPoint. Never over video conferencing though.
It works fine just using Keynote. It was the videoconferencing that tripped me up.
I’ve been on Macs since 2007 for personal use, and since 2016 (or so) for work use. I’ve always used PowerPoint, never had to use Keynote. I also use Webex (it’s the only one my company allows). No problems ever.
Yeah, the PowerPoint seemed like it converted, or didn't and just worked, it's not really my area of expertise. I could share the PowerPoint on WebEx, I just couldn't figure out how to switch to presentation mode. I had the thumbnails on the left side of my screen, but apparently not on the viewer's. It's not too tough to trip me up on tech issues.
Where does a Mac store documents? So, for example, if I'm drafting a letter, now I go into the C drive, pull up a similar letter, copy it, paste it onto a new document, and then edit the new document. How would that work on a Mac?
For a Mac, the default place for storing documents is the “Documents” folder (crazy, right?). The default way to access anything on your hard drive is through “Finder”, which should be in your task bar (called your “Dock”) as a default (you can add any application to your task bar by right clicking it and hitting “options” and then “keep in dock”). When you open “Finder”, you should have several places listed: documents, desktop, recents, photos, music, etc. When you find your document you can right click it and “Duplicate” (which duplicates it and names the copy whatever the old name was plus the word “copy” at the end) or you can open it, go to “file” (if you’re in Word), and then “save as”. You can then change the name of the document and the location where it is saved. The original will not be changed.
:lol: I haven't used it for documents yet. I've only done Zoom meetings and the aforementioned PowerPoint.
Even after using a Mac for 8-9 years for personal use, there was still a learning curve for learning it for work use. Some things are just different enough to through me off. But once I learned what I needed to, the Mac worked much better than my Dells or Thinkpads.
-
I’m thinking of getting one of the new M1 chip MacBooks but apparently there’s lots of software that isn’t compatible yet. Anyone got any hands on experience? I know it’s early days...
Not yet, but the reviews are awesome and the intel emulator (or whatever it’s called) is said to work well with the popular apps. I’ll get one when they have 4 USBC ports.
-
Interesting. I’ve done PowerPoint presentations on my Mac with the Mac OS version of PowerPoint. Never over video conferencing though.
It works fine just using Keynote. It was the videoconferencing that tripped me up.
I’ve been on Macs since 2007 for personal use, and since 2016 (or so) for work use. I’ve always used PowerPoint, never had to use Keynote. I also use Webex (it’s the only one my company allows). No problems ever.
Yeah, the PowerPoint seemed like it converted, or didn't and just worked, it's not really my area of expertise. I could share the PowerPoint on WebEx, I just couldn't figure out how to switch to presentation mode. I had the thumbnails on the left side of my screen, but apparently not on the viewer's. It's not too tough to trip me up on tech issues.
Where does a Mac store documents? So, for example, if I'm drafting a letter, now I go into the C drive, pull up a similar letter, copy it, paste it onto a new document, and then edit the new document. How would that work on a Mac?
For a Mac, the default place for storing documents is the “Documents” folder (crazy, right?). The default way to access anything on your hard drive is through “Finder”, which should be in your task bar (called your “Dock”) as a default (you can add any application to your task bar by right clicking it and hitting “options” and then “keep in dock”). When you open “Finder”, you should have several places listed: documents, desktop, recents, photos, music, etc. When you find your document you can right click it and “Duplicate” (which duplicates it and names the copy whatever the old name was plus the word “copy” at the end) or you can open it, go to “file” (if you’re in Word), and then “save as”. You can then change the name of the document and the location where it is saved. The original will not be changed.
-
1
-
-
Interesting. I’ve done PowerPoint presentations on my Mac with the Mac OS version of PowerPoint. Never over video conferencing though.
It works fine just using Keynote. It was the videoconferencing that tripped me up.
I’ve been on Macs since 2007 for personal use, and since 2016 (or so) for work use. I’ve always used PowerPoint, never had to use Keynote. I also use Webex (it’s the only one my company allows). No problems ever.
-
1
-
-
“simultaneously a football genius and the all-time worst late game coach in history.”As in the New Jersey Giants of Lesser Manning?
Oh, go f*ck yourself goose. And f*ck lerxt for liking your post.
I'll take the hit for that lol.
F*cking Assante Samuel. You can't hold on to a ball that hits you in the chest? F*cking Jarvis Green. You can't pull a QB down? F*cking Rodney Harrison. You let a guy catch the ball with one hand? F*cking Wes Welker. You drop a ball that hits your hands?
AAAAARGH!
Fukking Pete Carroll. You can't just hand the fukking ball to Marshawn Lynch.
Yeah I know, didn't cost my team 19-0 but it did cost them back to back and gave yours another. Sadly this shit happens to every team it feels like.
Did someone call me?
-
Yeah, but I think it can be discussed better in SOCN. The politics of the day don't have to poison every conversation. Sports should unite us...Let's keep things focused on football, and leave the politics in SOCN.
Thanks.
Unfortunately, it’s being jammed down our throats.
I don’t believe CT was rooting for the Deletriots.
-
Well Tom Brady still SUCKs!
FTFY
He’s surrounded by a stronger cast and he was able to to turn that game around himself.
-
1
-
-
Let's keep things focused on football, and leave the politics in SOCN.
Thanks.
Unfortunately, it’s being jammed down our throats. I’m out on the NBA...but that was easy as it was my 4th favorite sport and their support of pure evil in Hong Kong and Xinjiang is completely indefensible. MLB (my second favorite) was close, but they’ve dialed back the racist wokeness and aren’t nearly as hypocritical as the NBA. But the NFL is my favorite, and they’re laying it on thicker than the MLB, and this is becoming a close decision for me. I want the escapism of sports, and I’m unhappy that it’s being taken away.
-
The artificial crowd is pure shit. It’s the same senseless noise all game long. An irritating distraction.
It’s certainly weird, but complete silence might be weirder. And at least the artificial crowd doesn’t boo pregame political statements like the real one in KC.
-
1
-
-
I don’t know how many games I can watch before I OD on wokeness. I hope this peters out fast so I can watch a game and actually escape the political stupidity of America right now.
Code for "I'm tired of listening to/seeing black people complain"?
Just wondering.............
Please take your racist horseshit somewhere else.
-
2
-
What Made You Do A Facepalm Today??
in Random Samples
Posted
You said “Yes, the virus is definitely out there looking for hosts.If a number of adults are not good hosts due to vaccination and/or exposure the numbers may well increase in children, no one knows.”
I said “Infection is a function of exposure to the virus. With more adults already having had the virus or gotten vaccinated, children’s exposure to the virus decreases.”
My reference to herd immunity was to cement the point regarding decreased exposure as immunity numbers increase in direct contradiction to your earlier argument, and Rhyta’s.