Lurker > GreatEvilEmpire

Debbie Wasserman Schultz basically said said Awan's investigation was 'Islamophobic." I bet that left nut is eating her words now that Awan's been caught red handed. This is what happens when you consciously let your ideology cloud you from the truth.
---

Sig under construction!

Learn how to use reachability. Lightly double tap on the home button will bring the entire screen downward so you can hit the back button.

To play MP3's, download iTunes and drag and drop your MP3s into device. It will appear in the music library.
---

Sig under construction!

The Admiral posted...

ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack

https://nypost.com/2017/09/15/isis-claims-responsibility-for-london-subway-attack/

What a shock. I thought it was going to be an Eskimo for sure.

Let the left live in their own imaginary and keep denying reality.
---

Sig under construction!

We know who it's going to be. Islamic terrorists.
---

Sig under construction!

Looks like a fish. She's got a naturally unhappy face.
---

Sig under construction!

byron posted...

I love anuses.

You don't say?
---

Sig under construction!

byron posted...

When it works during release I will say nothing because it's doing what it's supposed to do.

Crawl just a little bit out of their anus.

You seem to love anuses. Good for you.
---

Sig under construction!

Bio1590 posted...

The thing is it wasn't even an issue with the software being in Beta. Whenever an iPhone is restarted you need to actually enter the lock code in the first time you want to unlock it, and from there on the fingerprint censor works. The face recognition obviously works the same way.

Whoever was setting this up forgot to unlock the phone with the code first before the demonstration.

Well, that proves my point. Facial recognition works. The setup team probably forgot to put in the unlock code.
---

Sig under construction!

byron posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

The software is still in Beta. The iPhone X is 1.5 months away from being shipped. It'll work when the phone is released.

Then why say that it has a facial recognition system that actually works if you've never seen the ready for release product?

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

I know it's fun to see Apple fail every now and then, but all they do is win.

How do they always win if they fail every now and then?

I've been using apple products pretty much my whole life but people who are so far up their ass are annoying as hell.

Because it worked the on the backup phone. Beta hardware with beta software is buggy, that's why they have a backup. When it works during release, what are you going to say? "They got lucky?"

If that's annoying to you, that's your problem, not mine.
---

Sig under construction!

byron posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

Facial recognition system that actually works.

https://clips.twitch.tv/GrossRepleteWatercressPrimeMe

The software is still in Beta. The iPhone X is 1.5 months away from being shipped. It'll work when the phone is released.

I know it's fun to see Apple fail every now and then, but all they do is win.
---

Sig under construction!

Facial recognition system that actually works. Powerful processor. OLED screen. And a fairly advanced camera system.
---

Sig under construction!

Almost centered.
---

Sig under construction!

Classical liberal. All the socialists need to move to Venezuela.
---

Sig under construction!

Your mom
---

Sig under construction!

This hag refuses to go away. She just doesn't know when to shut up. Every time she opens her mouth, she looks worse and worse.

America dodged a bullet. It's everyone's fault except for hers. Talk about being the worst leader you can possibly be, by blaming men and everyone except yourself, nearly 1 year after the election.
---

Sig under construction!

Soviet_Poland posted...

Unless your company is a non-profit dealing with underserved communities and you already have one marketing major in the company, but you'd like the added value of having the guy with the public health background provide additional input in any major marketing campaigns the company tries to introduce into the public, given their expressed interest in the marketing side of things.

This shit isn't generalizable. So many things are multidisciplinary. I was able to take a graduate level psych class in my undergrad years without the right prerequisites because I also minored in physiology. They asked my input when the subject material overlapped because they didn't have that.

It just takes a plan and creativity in knowing how your degree fits. The answer won't be as obvious as "apply to the philosophy factory" however.

You're looking for uncommon situations. More often than not, the marketing major will get hired over the non-marketing major for a marketing job. Take it from someone who helped hire over 30 people over the years, one of which was a chef.
---

Sig under construction!

Soviet_Poland posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

I wrote a lot of papers in college and I don't remember 90% of it. I took a fashion history class and I don't remember much of it. I know a guy who took 2 years of French. Without every day practice, he forgot most of it.

Still has a verifiable document stated he went through the class and earned credit.

Again, from an employment standpoint that information has value. A college education is more likely to have a certain minimum standard for work ethic. He passed the class. He went through the work. Maybe you thought college was easy. Great. You would have been a good hire from a company regardless of the degree. They don't know that.

If you hire a high school grad, it might be someone who's entire goal is to shirk as many responsibilities as possible, cannot self-think and just defers to the manager for every single tiny task rather than attempting to solve it on their own, and just works to get by to the weekend for smokes and drinks.

Maybe the college grad is like that too. But to say there is an equal chance of those types of employees is kind of a stretch.

I think we're having a pointless debate here. We agree with each other. The only thing I'm pointing out is the usefulness of one degree compared to another degree, not one degree compared to no degree.
---

Sig under construction!

Soviet_Poland posted...

Take two people with identical backgrounds and self-taught specialized knowledge appropriate for a job position. The one with the college degree, any degree, will be given more weight. And it's for reasons I stated before--when dealing with a large application pool at some point the decisions will be arbitrary. For reasons you may or may not agree with, a college degree will be perceived at having a higher problem solving capacity or work ethic.

This does not reflect reality in 100% of cases. But the reality is that more people with a college education will meet that minimum standard, so if you're taking a gamble on an applicant, it only makes sense to take the one with a degree.

Like I said, I don't disagree with you that holding a degree holds more weight. Holding a college degree means someone has enough responsibility to commit to 4 years of school. They have more experience working with people, understanding processes, have a better work ethic, etc, etc. I like I said, I agree with you on that respect. But I'm really talking about comparing one degree to another degree.

Take for instance. Someone who has a Public Health degree, can't find a job in Public Health, so that person decides to get a entry level Marketing position. How do you think that Public Health degree will fare against other candidates who majored in Marketing? The choice is obvious, you want someone with marketing experience.
---

Sig under construction!

Polycosm posted...

Never mind the fact that reading only gets you two steps up the pyramid of Bloom's Taxonomy, at best. Even then, I doubt how much information someone would actually retain, cramming two courses worth of material into two weeks. As for "understanding," well... it's an easy claim to make, when one is completely untested.

Taking 2 courses and not making every day use of it leads to the same result. If you don't use that knowledge on a consistent basis, it will slowly fade away.

I wrote a lot of papers in college and I don't remember 90% of it. I took a fashion history class and I don't remember much of it. I know a guy who took 2 years of French. Without every day practice, he forgot most of it.

Retaining knowledge requires you to have an incredible memory, which most of us don't have or you have to practice that knowledge everyday, requiring you to constant reference, recommit to memory and expand on it.
---

Sig under construction!

Soviet_Poland posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

If you don't use it as a bridge to something else, it's useless. A psychology degree by itself is not very useful.

I don't disagree with you on that point, but I did obtain employment prior to getting accepted to medical school in a sort of "self-created" job that was much better paid and with benefits, but being college educated really was a cited factor for them giving me a chance. The annual salary was higher than what it cost to get my degree.

Like I said, a psych degree won't get you employment in the field, but an undergraduate degree does open more doors if you're creative with your job searching.

All you're advocating is going into college without being informed or without a plan is a bad idea. Congrats, the rest of the world agrees with you. But there is a subset that take it to mean all of college isn't worth it and I can't make assumptions as to what camp you subscribe to.

Any undergraduate degrees gives you a better chance at finding a job than not having one. You won't ever see me disagree with that. The idea to to find a major worth investing in, a field that can actually translate to a job in the real world once you graduate. Take for instance. A Gender Studies degree gets you a job working in the gender studies field. A Public Health degree gets you work in the public health field.

But as I said, those degrees have very little practicality if you're looking for a job. You spend 4 years and over $100K on a degree that doesn't translate into a career. That's why people consider those degrees "worthless" and 'useless'. I'm sure you learn something, but when it's being compared relatively to other degrees, it's a lot less useful. Everyone know it's not 100% useless as you do learn some foundation that can be useful, but it does have a high degree of non-usefulness.

If you're going to further into the medical field, then your psychology degree is being put to use. I'm happy for you. I don't work in the medical field, but I do work closely with a number of doctors on building software to improve doctor-patient interactions.
---

Sig under construction!

Soviet_Poland posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

A Psychology degree is just another term for customer service.

Funny, I have a psychology degree and it qualified me to get into medical school. So far, it's helped me a lot in terms of being a better communicator and being mindful of my bedside manner with patients, because contrary to our sentiments, patients seem to care more about how we treat them as people than how competent we are at dealing with their disease process. So being good at both just makes me a better doctor.

So to make sweeping generalizations that any field of study is useless is just lowering my assessment of how intelligent you really think you are.

If you don't use it as a bridge to something else, it's useless. A psychology degree by itself is not very useful. If you look at my earlier post, I used the word "many" and "most" in my arguments. I didn't say "all", which would be generalizing.
---

Sig under construction!

badwinkles posted...

it wasn't necessary to use the term thugs
its not even mentioned in the article TC. fucking wierdo

Thugs doesn't mean a certain race. But based on some confirmations, we both know the race of the shooters already.
---

Sig under construction!

Verdekal posted...

Have you actually read that art book?

Why don't you try going head to head with a PhD in those fields and tell me how they trounced you.

Trounce you? What are you, 18?

Who cares if they can trounce me with their Art History PhD degree? I have very little practical use for art history right now. And yes, I have read a decent part of it.

Here is the reality. People with degrees with little to no practicality (useless degrees) usually end up in customer service. A Psychology degree is just another term for customer service. Gender Studies is just another term for customer service. Public health is just another term for customer service. Philosophy? That's just another term for customer service, but if you're lucky, you just may end up in financial accounts.
---

Sig under construction!

COVxy posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

COVxy posted...

What university offers a degree in parapsychology?

There's a few.

So few, probably rivals the number of universities that literally offer underwater basket weaving.

I threw the last couple in there as a joke. If you didn't see it, I can't help you.
---

Sig under construction!

COVxy posted...

What university offers a degree in parapsychology?

There's a few.

http://www.parapsych.org/articles/34/41/united_states.aspx

Maybe it was more popular during the X-Files era, but most of parapsychology courses are now online.
---

Sig under construction!

Polycosm posted...

Being able to learn on your own is a valuable skill which everyone should master. But learning at a university matched to your ability is far more efficient (albeit far more expensive too).

That's wrong. It's inefficient. They make you take useless classes to meet their credit requirements. You're only take a few classes related to your major per semester and students usually read what is asked of them. People with real interest in a subject can learn it in a couple weeks of dedicated studying instead of months.

Most college degrees are scams. They want you to spend 4 years there so they can make money, when that degree can easily be condense to less than 2 years. Undergraduate college is great for meeting girls, but for education, it's questionable. Look at many the naive protesting college students around the country and you tell me they really know what they're doing.
---

Sig under construction!

Verdekal posted...

Okay, what you just said is something I have a huge problem with.

It's REALLY arrogant to think someone can pick up books on a subject and become as erudite as a PhD holder in those fields. People who say this have usually never been judged by a master of that field.

What education does is create standards to a subject. We say who in those fields has demonstrated competencies and then they are qualified in that field.

If everyone just read on something, there would be many different opinions on the same work and more than half of them would be pretty off the mark.

I have a 1000 page Art History book on my shelf. I can read it and learn more about art history than 2 college courses combined. Why do I need to pay a school thousands to do that and the only jobs I can find are work in a Museum and maybe as a Professor? The most common path for people with useless degrees is customer service...I've seen so many cases of it. You need a bit more schooling for Philosophy, but why bother?

There are many things I've picked up over the years that makes me as good, if not better than many people who majored in it. One of them is marketing. Another is project management. Most people sleepwalk through college, so their knowledge is fairly shallow. If I'm passionate enough about something and I want to spend time learning it, I can be just as good, if not better than many college majors.

You may think it's arrogant, but I'm confident about my abilities. When you think about how much time people spend on a major, it's not that much. Most colleges don't give you the good stuff until the last year, because their whole scheme is make you stretch everything to 4 years, when most of the material can easily be condense to a year.
---

Sig under construction!

You can learn by reading. Most of those 'degrees' are nothing but hobbies.

Philosophy, Gender Studies, Lesbian Studies, Art History, Parapsychology and David Beckham Studies can all be learned just be doing some research and or reading.

To spend a $100k on it and have little practicality in the real world, that's what you call wasted money.
---

Sig under construction!

Godnorgosh posted...

It's a fun major that legitimately makes you a better thinker. That might sound like nonsense coming from other fields, but with philosophy it's definitely true. It's probably better to double major if you're going for philosophy, but some of us enjoy it so much that it's hard to resist the temptation.

I also didn't know what I wanted to do with my life when I was in college and didn't want to major in something I wasn't sure I'd like.

Philosophy is hobby, not a major. You can pick up a couple well-known philosophy books and read it and you can feel like a better thinker.

Unless you're using it as a bridge to get to something else, it's as useless as they come. You can always become a Philosophy teacher, I suppose.
---

Sig under construction!

My degree was a waste of money, like most degrees are. The real education comes after you graduate.

And whoever is majoring in philosophy... it's never too late to change majors or quit and go to trade school. Why are you wasting time and money on that useless major?
---

Sig under construction!

masterpug53 posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

masterpug53 posted...

Lost_All_Senses posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...


What a day for usernames matching quality of posts.

So you're a dog? Good boy. Here's a treat.

Lmao, it truly never ceases to amuse when people on a gaming site show their asses by not getting my username.

And it never ceases to amuse when people take a screen name literally. I mean you are a hideous goblin carrying a lantern while dressed up in homeless clothing, right?
---

Sig under construction!

Medussa posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

I post an article written by a transgender

1) no you didn't. Walt isn't, wasn't trans. he made a mistake, and has made it his mission in life since to take it out on the rest of us.

2) Brynn is trans

3) my link is sourced, from actual researchers. say what you want about huffpo, it just so happens to be where she put up the article aggregating the links. the meat of the argument is not a huffpo link, it's what's conveniently linked in the huffpo link.

edit: 4) trans isn't a noun. if you want to actually have your argument taken seriously, maybe you should show you at least have a 101 understanding of the topic.

5) you call out huffpo as a biased source and counter with the federalist? are you fucking serious?

Fucking seriously? You're going to make a big deal about whether trans is a noun or not? Or maybe I should go to Dictionary.com for you:


noun
2.
a person who is transgender or transsexual.

Brynn is an advocate, nothing more. She will cover anything up to make her case. Again, if it's 2.2%, the suicide rate wouldn't be so high. People are lying through their teeth to make things look rosey. 41% suicide rate is very real and it doesn't reflect the nonsense that is 2.2%. This article does a good job of explaining the truth of the matter.

http://www.thestranger.com/features/2017/06/28/25252342/the-detransitioners-they-were-transgender-until-they-werent
---

Sig under construction!

masterpug53 posted...

Lost_All_Senses posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...


What a day for usernames matching quality of posts.

So you're a dog? Good boy. Here's a treat.
---

Sig under construction!

Medussa posted...

the hypocrisy in this post has to be intentional, right?

2.2% is bullshit. Everyone knows it. I post an article written by a transgender and you're happy to dismiss it because it doesn't fit your narrative. If it's only 2.2%, the suicide rate wouldn't be so high. Blacks have been oppressed, rejected by society, bullied by society for over a century before the civil rights movement. You don't see them committing suicide in droves.
---

Sig under construction!

kkTheKiller42 posted...

So i'm still gonna ask, why should children be allowed to make the decision to transition?

Legitimate question, no one's really answered the question other than some deflecting by healthcare, yeah we get doctors involved and parents, but it still falls on a childs decision if they want to go through with it no?

They shouldn't. No matter who says what, children should NOT be allowed to make these decisions. If the child want to have sex, it still falls on a child's decision if they want to go through with it no? Or maybe someone should be a responsible adult and prevent kids from making a decision based on immature emotions.
---

Sig under construction!

Medussa posted...

that statistic is completely unsourced. the number of documented regret is less than 2%.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/myths-about-transition-regrets_b_6160626.html

Your source has been manipulated. Seriously, you're going to link to HuffPost, a trash rag of a website that is written by unpaid bloggers? Maybe you should read something real, from an actual transgender.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/19/transgender-regret-is-real-even-if-the-media-tell-you-otherwise/
---

Sig under construction!

Sayoria posted...

Or they are unstable because they didn't grow up with loving families like I did. My family has been overly supportive of me and I'm fine. I'm patient where I need to be. I got a job and have been working since 2007 to pay for my SRS, which I will finally get in 2018. After getting on hormones, I finally lost my "asexuality" and I've become sexually interested in others. I also enrolled back in school because I became more motivated when I got on my estradiol.

So say what you want, but transitioning is helping me a lot. In many ways, shapes and forms and I love it. I know many others would be just as fine if they weren't kicked out of their houses, discriminated in job searching, and didn't live in areas where everyone told them they were going to burn in Hell. You know, that's what really pushes trans people over to depression. We can deal with who we are with the support we need. Those without can't, and it is the parents of those who can't who are entirely at fault.

Good for you, but it still doesn't change the facts. You let me know how you feel after you fully transitioned, not just being in transition. 1 in 5 transgenders face regret. Others are not satisfied with the change, causing them to do rash things. You don't have to take my word for it. You should read the research yourself.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2004/jul/30/health.mentalhealth
---

Sig under construction!

Sayoria posted...

Damn, who knew that surgery regret was the lead cause of suicide and not social rejection, family rejection, and inability to get a job because no one wants to hire a "freak" as they say?

Of course they would commit suicide because of the surgery. What other reasons would there be?

Or maybe because most transgenders were mentally unstable to begin with. Reclassifying it to not be a mental illness doesn't make it any less of a mental illness.

The insecurity combined with the less a spectacular expectation will only heightened that insecurity, leading to other rash decisions.
---

Sig under construction!

Being a transgender is purely cosmetic and nothing more. You're never really a male or female. You don't have the biological functions of the sex you transitioned into. Trans men still get periods. Trans women has a piece of meat as a penis.

That's why even after being fully transitioned, many transgender people still commit suicide. They realized that the change was cosmetic and it wasn't what they expected. Or they regret their decision and couldn't change back.

You should never let kids make these type of decisions when they're so immature. Most parents don't let their kids have a tattoo, but some are stupid enough to let them make a life altering decision.
---

Sig under construction!

Kids and teenagers are the most insecure and indecisive people on the planet. That's why transgender procedures should be reserved for people over the age of 18.

If you don't trust them to have consensual sex, why would you trust them to make the decision to cut their dick off and scar them for life?
---

Sig under construction!

Natural climate change. Ever heard of it?

I bet if you lived in the ice age and the ice caps are melting, splitting the continents, you'd probably run around like a crazed madman.

Calm your tits.
---

Sig under construction!

RebelElite791 posted...

Not in the original post I quoted you illiterate

Oh, let the insults keep flying little man. Read my original post. "So socialist" indicates a high degree of socialism and it's encompassing of policies. If you're this dumb and I have to explain to you, then you need to go back to studying instead of playing video games all day.
---

Sig under construction!

RebelElite791 posted...

Linux and Skype.

Linux's humble origins may have began in Europe, but the current beast is very much an American creation, as the last 2 decade of development, the meat of the OS has been done here in the United States. And Skype, something from the early 2000's that was bought by an American Company has been a stateside product since 2005. I mean you really have dig deep to find something, anything that's recent enough to be consider this decade. Meanwhile, American tech companies flourish by the thousands.
---

Sig under construction!

RebelElite791 posted...

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

what

What what?

European countries don't have a search engine to call their own. Russia has Yandex. China has 2 search engines. All European countries use Google, instead of creating their own search engine. They use WhatsApp and Facebook instead of creating their own chat apps. Yes, I call them lazy because many people in those countries are spoiled lazy by socialist policies and generous vacations.

"What" because they're not fucking socialist lmao

Stay in school Timmy.

You can't read? I said socialist policies and generous vacations. Are you European? I mean it hates to hear the truth, but that's the truth.

China has WeChat and other chat apps. What does Europe have? I like said, so many people, so many companies and still couldn't produce anything worthwhile.
---

Sig under construction!

s0nicfan posted...

This certainly explains why they're going so hard after US-based tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Apple.

And they couldn't do it effectively because these companies are based in the United States.
---

Sig under construction!

RebelElite791 posted...

what

What what?

European countries don't have a search engine to call their own. Russia has Yandex. China has 2 search engines. All European countries use Google, instead of creating their own search engine. They use WhatsApp and Facebook instead of creating their own chat apps. Yes, I call them lazy because many people in those countries are spoiled lazy by socialist policies and generous vacations.
---

Sig under construction!

This has been going on for years. They've been requesting Google to delete search results because European politicians have been caught cheating on their significant others or doing other embarrassing or criminal things.

The other thing is that companies like Google, Facebook and Microsoft control so much of their data that they're really uncomfortable with it. But it's Europe's fault for being so socialist...otherwise they wouldn't be so lazy and come up with a Search product to compete against Google.

All they do now is complain and find ways to screw over US companies.
---

Sig under construction!

coolboy11 posted...

Kaepernick was never going to be signed because it is clear that a league where the vast majority of owners supported the orange one (except for the great Arthur Blank of course) was never going to let him be signed

Kaepernick sucks
he played on one of the shittier teams in the league and still put up fairly solid stats, secondly most NFL QBs are trash and less trash not a lot of high quality QB play in the league right now that justifies him not being signed

You don't sound like a victim at all. Oh wait, yes you do.
---

Sig under construction!

This is what some people don't seem to understand. Kaepernick sucks and he brings bad publicity. He was about to get signed, given a 2nd chance and his loudmouth racist girlfriend can't control her racist tendencies. What's worse, Kaepernick didn't say anything to distance himself from it, that means he supports the tweet.

How are you going to agree with something that depicts your possible future boss as a slave owner and the guy working to sign you as a house slave? How is that acceptable in any employment situation? Kaepernick is done. His NFL career is over. He's a shit show and after this nonsense, no one will want to sign him.
---

Sig under construction!