SoylentNews

I took one of the more scenic routes home from work today. I needed a router bit, so stopped off at the local lumber yard / tool shops. Business finished, I started thinking about food. There's a Burger King just down the hill from Bailey's Building supplies, so I thought I'd give that impossible burger a try.

It's important to understand a couple things:
1. I ordered the burgers to go, and I ate one driving down the road toward home.
2. I was hungry to start with.
3. I did not unpackage the burger for inspection before eating it.

So, I'm tooling along, with one red light between me and the open road. Reach into the bag, and pull out a burger. Fold that flap back - the light stays green - and I take a tentative bite. Hmmm - not bad. It tastes pretty good, really.

So, over the course of five miles or so, I'm chowing down. And, getting less hungry. That's kinda the whole point, I think. Fill belly until hunger fades, or something like that. And, as the hunger fades, the sandwich tastes less beefy. The next couple miles pass, and the sandwich seems to last longer and longer. Hunger is gone, and that sandwich just doesn't taste like beef anymore. In fact, that last bite was something of a chore to finish chewing, and swallowing.

Now, let me start over. The appearance of the meatless patty is pretty convincing. It even has char-broiling stripes across it, just as you expect with a Burger King burger. The texture is pretty convincing too. It's a rather dry burger, but very burger like. The smell . . . it doesn't smell beefy, but it doesn't smell bad. Chewing the patty was convincing, initially, but at some point, it became less convincing.

Luckily, I bought two of them, so I could evaluate it when I got home.

Fold back the paper, and you see a pretty standard sesame seed bun. Pull the top off, you see standard lettuce, tomato, onions, a bit of pickle, and some mayo-based sauce. The patty looks like a pretty standard 1/4 pound burger. Pinch off a bit of patty, and there are no strands, no tubular shaped spirals, and no evidence of fat. It's a fibery mat, really. Taste it, and it's kinda beef-like, but not beefy. Smell it - there's no sign of cow.

Do I like it? Well, when I was hungry, it went down pretty well. It's hamburger-like enough to convince a hungry stomach that it's pretty real. But, it just doesn't cut it as I get filled up. I highly doubt that I'll ever buy another. I might eat one again, if someone buys it and offers it to me.

They might do better deep frying these things. Call it a beef flavored fritter, or a beef flavored hush puppy. If the patty had a bit of crunch to it, I might enjoy it more. Or, maybe if the interior of the patty contained more moisture, it would be better.

This thing isn't "bad", but it's just not "good".

I recommend that everyone try one, and make your own mind up about it. It's unlikely to leave you gagging, but I don't think you're going to fall in love with it.

Want the details? Here’s the ingredient list:

Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose, Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12.

Contains: Soy

https://faq.impossiblefoods.com/hc/en-us/articles/360018937494

Enjoy your own adventure! I'll stick with beef when I feel like eating beef in the future. I've done my bit for scientific research!

Honkai Impact 3rd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P909aUnspT4

tldw: A lonely girl with icy heart, standing alone on the battlefield.

https://vimeo.com/365065377

Pat's stated purpose for making that video is anti-gun. But, a large number of people have observed that the video is nothing more than gun porn. In fact, I borrowed the title for this journal entry from a commenter on another forum.

I think that Patrick Smith is confused about his gun gender, LOL!!

Man shoots granddaughter's boyfriend during violent home invasion, JPSO says

A Bridge City man shot his granddaughter’s boyfriend in the groin with a shotgun after the boyfriend forced his way into a house and violently beat the man, authorities said.

Miguel Ramirez, 25, of Marrero, was arrested early Monday at a Kenner hospital where he sought treatment for his wounds, said Capt. Jason Rivarde, spokesman for the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office.

Ramirez is also accused of kidnapping his 22-year-old girlfriend after attacking her grandfather, 66.

The violent confrontation began Sunday night when Ramirez and his girlfriend were involved in a “physical altercation” somewhere in New Orleans, according to Rivarde. No details were available Thursday about that incident.

After the fight, the couple went to her grandparents’ home on 15th Street in Bridge City about 11:30 p.m. to pick up their three young children, according to Rivarde. The woman went into the house to get the kids, who are under the age of 5.

The woman told her grandfather about the altercation and asked him to contact authorities for help.

But before he could call 911, Ramirez stormed into the house and began beating the grandfather, authorities said. The grandfather suffered a broken nose, severe swelling around his eyes and bruising on his face.

Ramirez then grabbed his girlfriend and dragged her out of the house, according to Rivarde.

“The grandfather, fearing that (Ramirez) is going to harm his granddaughter, gets his shotgun and fires one time,” Rivarde said.

Ramirez managed to get to his vehicle and drive off with his girlfriend.

The grandfather didn’t realize that he had wounded Ramirez, who had been shot in the groin and thigh, Rivarde said. He called 911 to report the home invasion.

Meanwhile, Ramirez drove to Ochsner Medical Center in Kenner. Emergency room doctors there notified authorities about the gunshot wounds, and Sheriff’s Office investigators arrived.

Ramirez was later booked into the Jefferson Parish Correctional Center in Gretna on counts of home invasion, second-degree battery, simple kidnapping and domestic abuse-child endangerment. He was being held without bail Thursday, according to jail records.

A shotgun isn't my first choice of weapon, but they are effective!!!

The next circuit I've begun experimenting on is Aaron Logue's circuit. The annoying thing about this and many other circuits of its type based on PN junction breakdown noise is the requirement for a 12V supply, which I've been using a power brick and a 7812 regulator to obtain. Because at one point I had a brain fart, I managed to fry my Orange Pi Zero. I missed one stupid wire that connected the 12V supply I was using to the 5V rails on the breadboard... to which the Orange Pi was also connected, and then the magic smoke left my poor Orange Pi... $20 up in smoke. Rest in peace.

So I ordered a new Orange Pi Zero, which I received today, and resumed my experiments as soon as I managed to solder the GPIO headers onto it. This time making VERY sure that there were no stray wires to the breadboard that would send higher voltages to the 5V supply rails, I hooked the OPi up to the breadboard again, and damn if it didn't give a lot of very good randomness. It's far more effective than the LM393 circuit that is used by the XR232-USB, as it only requires a single level of von Neumann debiasing to obtain randomness that is good enough for all the statistical tests I've been using to validate its performance.

The only problem is that I now need a place to get 12V. Either I use a boost converter to get 12V out of the 5V that I can get off the OPi, or keep using the 12V supply brick from my experiments but also use it to power the OPi with a 12V to 5V buck converter. I thought the latter would be easier, but the problem is that the trusty old 7805 linear converter I use for my TTL circuits will melt if I attempt to down-convert 12V to 5V at 500 mA, unless I use a heat sink that is probably going to be too big to fit inside the case. So I also managed to get a few small 12V to 5V switching converters (smaller than a TO-220 package), but alas the ones I got can't handle the current drawn by the OPi either. Seems that a buck converter that can actually handle the OPi's current draw might be rather larger than can fit as well.

So now I have to find a small boost converter that can boost 5V to 12V. The rated current needed here is far more modest (of the order of µA), so such a module might be smaller, but one that might suit is hard to find. I have a boost converter module based on the LM2577 but it is much too big to fit in the case. The circuits involving the MAX232 that I've used before to get 18V are also too large. I've found one possible boost converter module that might suit but it is a bit more expensive, but we'll see how this goes.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/11/us/ar-15-guns-law-atf-invs/index.html

He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts

By Scott Glover, CNN

Updated 7:07 PM ET, Fri October 11, 2019

(CNN)For more than a year, Joseph Roh illegally manufactured AR-15-style rifles in a warehouse south of Los Angeles.
His customers, more than two dozen of whom were legally prohibited from possessing a firearm, could push a button, pull a lever, and walk away a short time later with a fully assembled, untraceable semi-automatic weapon for about $1,000, according to court records.
Roh continued his black-market operation despite being warned in person by agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that he was breaking the law.
But five years after raiding his business and indicting him, federal authorities quietly cut a deal with Roh earlier this year and agreed to drop the charges.
Why?
The judge in the case had issued a tentative order that, in the eyes of prosecutors, threatened to upend the decades-old Gun Control Act and "seriously undermine the ATF's ability to trace and regulate firearms nationwide."

A case once touted by prosecutors as a crackdown on an illicit firearms factory was suddenly seen as having the potential to pave the way to unfettered access to one of the most demonized guns in America.
Federal authorities preferred to let Roh go free rather than have the ruling become final and potentially create case law that could have a crippling effect on the enforcement of gun laws, several sources familiar with the matter told CNN. Each requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case and its possible implications.

The guns are sometimes assembled from separately acquired parts. Under federal law, the one regulated individual part of a firearm is what's known as the frame or receiver — a piece that, among other things, provides a housing for the hammer and firing mechanism of a gun.

Though incapable of firing a round, the part is considered a gun in its own right and is subject to the same restrictions as a fully intact firearm. Manufacturers must stamp it with a serial number and licensed dealers are required to conduct background checks on prospective buyers. The restrictions are intended, in part, to keep felons and other people prohibited from possessing firearms from acquiring them piece by piece.
AR-15s, however, do not have a single receiver that meets that definition. They have both an upper and lower receiver — two parts as opposed to the single part described in the law.

At issue in Roh's case was whether the law could fairly be interpreted to apply to just the lower receiver of the AR-15, as the ATF has been doing for decades.

'There is a disconnect'
Though the trial lasted less than a week, Selna deliberated for more than year. In April, he issued a tentative order in which he determined that the ATF had improperly classified the AR-15 lower receivers in Roh's case as firearms.
He rejected the prosecution's argument that the ATF's interpretation of the regulation describing a receiver could reasonably be applied to the device at issue in Roh's case.
"There is a disconnect," the judge wrote.
Selna added that the combination of the federal law and regulation governing the manufacturing of receivers is "unconstitutionally vague" as applied in the case against Roh.
"No reasonable person would understand that a part constitutes a receiver where it lacks the components specified in the regulation," Selna wrote.
Therefore, the judge determined, "Roh did not violate the law by manufacturing receivers."

Interesting that the gun control lobby is unable to define "assault weapon" or "assault rifle", while at the same time, the ATF is also unable to define "firearm".

As a sidenote, how many are aware that a muzzle loading rifle is NOT considered a "firearm"? http://guide.sportsmansguide.com/adventures/muzzleloader-considered-firearm/

And, the genius of Uber is:

- people enjoy driving, so it doesn't feel like work, so why not get "paid" even if it's barely break-even for the risk and actual expenses for doing something you enjoy?

- people are stupid about what they call "sunk costs" - your car is only a sunk cost if you are never going to replace it, tires wear by the mile, as do timing belts, alternators, water pumps, and all the other things that are going to need service before you send the car to the junk heap. Even the window seals and other things not normally serviced wear faster when exposed to driving as opposed to being parked, particularly if you park in a shelter.

What's missing from the above analysis is also "- people learn from experience" and "- people aren't going to get out of bed, if their cut of the action is too low."

Let's consider that first bullet point. People learn from experience. I doubt, for example, that JoeMerchant learned of the many costs of car ownership from a class or via hearsay. Similarly, how is one to learn the many niggling details of the cost of being their own employer (or an employer of others!), if they never experience it?

It's no secret that Uber has massive turnover, in part due to the heavy competition by drivers who are not fully clued in. So what? That's thousands of drivers who each year will learn what competition and costs mean at low cost to the rest of us (we get a lot of cheap rides out of this, remember?). And as bonus, they'll get a piece of JoeMerchant's hard-earned tax dollars and we get a quality bellyache from a guy who wouldn't have cared in the least otherwise, if Uber weren't somehow peripherally involved.

Let's consider another example which occasionally is seen in universal basic income (UBI) arguments. When people don't have to work, they'll instead pour their time into hobbies which somehow will be better for us than the work would be. We'll get like one or two orders of magnitude more awesome guitar solos. That surely more than compensates for having fewer people who actually know how to do stuff that keeps societies functioning, right?

That's also ignoring that most peoples' hobbies will be watching porn and other push media on the internet.

How does one learn to manage their time, or manage other people, if they never do it? The nuts and bolts of particular industries? How to help people? The huge thing missed is that all this work has created a huge population of people who know what they are doing. Take it away and you take away the competence as well.

Free speech is a bedrock value in this country. But it isn’t the only one. Like all values, it must be held in tension with others, such as equality, safety and robust democratic participation. Speech should be protected, all things being equal. But what about speech that’s designed to drive a woman out of her workplace or to bully a teenager into suicide or to drive a democracy toward totalitarianism? Navigating these trade-offs is thorny, as trade-offs among core principles always are. But that doesn’t mean we can avoid navigating them at all.

There's plenty wrong in the essay, such as conflating words and deeds, or assuming that evil would be stopped, if only we kept the perpetrators from being able to speak out. But I think this covers the core faults of the essay in this short paragraph.

The first and most glaring one is discounting "core principles" because they occasionally conflict with other core principles. This isn't some magic discovery. We've known for centuries about such conflicts. What he doesn't get is that the reason freedom of speech is so absolute in the US is because any exceptions are so easy to game and create much bigger problems than the conflicts they're supposed to resolve. Consider his proposed solutions:

Congress could fund, for example, a national campaign to promote news literacy, or it could invest heavily in library programming. It could build a robust public media in the mold of the BBC. It could rethink Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — the rule that essentially allows Facebook and YouTube to get away with (glorification of) murder. If Congress wanted to get really ambitious, it could fund a rival to compete with Facebook or Google, the way the Postal Service competes with FedEx and U.P.S.

The executive branch and its political appointees would get to decide what "news literacy", "library programming", "decency", and "robust public media" are (currently, that's the Trump administration, folks). And creating a heavily subsidized, monopoly provider for social media and web search is begging for the jackboot of tyranny to step in. It's remarkable how the author can show moderate understanding of some of the nuance of free speech and then propose these remarkably terrible ideas without any thought for the unintended consequences of those ideas.

A second is the remarkable lack of justification for the compromise of freedom of speech. All the author can do is point to a handful of deaths and minor drama on the internet. There's absolutely no large scale protection of "equality, safety and robust democratic participation" going on, much less needed. It's just small scale things like "bully a teenager into suicide" or incredibly nebulous threats like "drive a democracy toward totalitarianism". On the latter where does this essay fall? Should we be censoring it as a sufficient threat to the democracy of the US since after all it recommends serious compromises of that democracy?

Third is that such core principles will always be in conflict. There's always an excuse to meddle and choke off our rights. We don't need a general tool when basic law, particularly, law on criminal acts covers the bases quite well.

Ultimately, this is a ridiculous, myopic effort that would cause more problems than it fixes. We have better things to do than break things that work (and have worked well for centuries!) for problems that mostly don't even exist.

Old news, from July of this year - https://100percentfedup.com/armed-antifa-terrorist-manifesto-reveals-inspiration-by-democrat-aoc/

Odd, I do a search for Willem Van Spronsen and there seem to be zero hits from the liberal mainstream media. Fox is the sixth hit, washingtontimes and washington post a ways down from Fox. Several lesser known sites cover him, like pacificpundit, thefederalist, legalinsurrection. There is no CNN, NBC, ABC - wait, back about three pages apnews.com - https://apnews.com/6bbb56a3887e46db80516a01858b5e75

ARMED ANTIFA TERRORIST Manifesto Reveals Inspiration By Democrat AOC

Yesterday, an armed self-described member of Antifa, Willem Van Spronsen, a was shot and killed by law enforcement officers after he threw explosives at an ICE detention center in Tacoma, WA.

Seattle Times reports that this was not Van Spronsen’s first run in with law enforcement tied to an immigration detention center

Van Spronsen’s manifesto was filled with radical rhetoric frequently heard coming from the leftist media and far-left Democrat U.S. Representatives like AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.

In this page of his manifesto, the Antifa terrorist adopts the term “concentration camps” used by Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) to describe detention centers on our southern border used to house illegal aliens.

In this page of his manifesto, Van Spronsen uses a term used by another radical leftist, Michael Brown’s stepfather, who called on Black Lives Matter terrorists to “burn the motherf**ker down!”, a reference to burning down the city of Ferguson, MO, after Officer Wilson was exonorated in the highly charged “hands up, don’t shoot” case, that proved the whole “hands up don’t shoot” exchange never took place. He also cites the “Proud Boys,” a group that was formed to protect free speech advocates from the violent anti-free speech terror group, Antifa.

Finally, on this page, Willem Van Spronsen makes his allegience to Antifa known, saying: “i am antifa.” He also indicates that he is part of a trans community, as he identifies his “trans comrades” a term commonly used when referring to fellow communists.

Conservative, First Amendment defender and trial lawyer, Harmeet K. Dhillon tweeted a thread likening the John Brown Gun Club, “JBGC” to a gateway drug to the violent Antifa terror group. After independent journalist Andy Ngo was severely beaten by Antifa in Portland, OR, Dhillon agreed to defend him in his case against the brutal leftist terrorists.

The fact that leftist terrorists have killed few people is not a result of their more civilized, or humane conduct. It is a result of their incompetence to terrorize people.

I just stumbled over this damned fool, while searching for AOC Manifesto. That was the subject of discussion on talk radio this morning. AOC has written a manifesto. She can be expected to shoot up a school, or a gay bar, or a synagogue soon. How many other shooters first published a manifesto, then went out to kill as many people as possible before the law caught up to them? O'Crazio is certainly crazy enough to shoot up a school!!

Just read the manifesto - it's full of acts giving American wealth away to anyone who ambles up to the border, and demands it.

Enjoy a video -
https://www.newswars.com/aoc-unveils-manifesto-a-just-society-means-rent-control-abolish-prisons-welfare-for-all-illegals/