SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,842
Where's the fun in that? :eek:

Means we can disconnect our humanity whilst we wipe out native populations of planets so we can settle on them.

It'll all be done in secret, but after 20 years of robots sorting everything out, it'll make lots of money!
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
Means we can disconnect our humanity whilst we wipe out native populations of planets so we can settle on them.

It'll all be done in secret, but after 20 years of robots sorting everything out, it'll make lots of money!
Tbh we should have robot wars already. A combat area and when some country pisses you off. You challenge them to a combat of robots winner takes the argument. Would be a lot more civilised without killing or displacing ppl
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,842
Tbh we should have robot wars already. A combat area and when some country pisses you off. You challenge them to a combat of robots winner takes the argument. Would be a lot more civilised without killing or displacing ppl

But we know that isn't what will happen; what will happen is that we'll put loads of robots into countries we're at war with and just tear the country apart.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
Tbh we should have robot wars already. A combat area and when some country pisses you off. You challenge them to a combat of robots winner takes the argument. Would be a lot more civilised without killing or displacing ppl
Utopian thinking

We'd just finish the fight, not accept the result and fight for real.

We're a fucking dumb animal.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
On the back of Picard I watched Star Trek: Nemesis.

It's actually better than I remembered. That's not actually saying much. But it's not shite. I think I must have had a reaction at the time because I was totally "WTF! why the fuck would you kill Data off in the last ever film?!!"
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
I went on a speed awareness course and they were singing the praises of smart motorways.

I said that the death rate on smart motorways is ten times that of normal motorways and they said two things:

They said "the most dangerous place on a motorway if you stop your car is the hard shoulder - so that's why it's good it's gone" - so I pointed out the most dangerous place on a motorway if you stop your car is NO hard shoulder in live lanes.

They then asked where I'd got my figures from because the DfT has provided theirs - so I said the DfT, and they went "what?"

Fucking minimum wage monkeys pumping out the government line.

Anyway. Didn't get any points :)
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
In the five years before the road was converted into a smart motorway there were just 72 near misses. In the five years after, there were 1,485.
That says all you need to know.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps told BBC Panorama he wants to fix smart motorways because they are too confusing for drivers.
They're not confusing. They're inherently dangerous.

Grant Shapps is just a Tory cunt who won't say "it's going to cost us a fuckton to make all our motorways 4-lane because we'd have to upgrade all the bridges - which is hella expensive - so we'd rather remove the hard shoulder and watch poor people who can't afford cars that don't break down die instead".
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
They are a fucking shambles and the wifes sisters boyfriend....are you still with me....works for the company overseeing their implementation, we had a discussion and he defends them with raw figures..of course like all middle class consultants he drives a brand new company car and breaking down hasnt happened to him in 20 years.
They are dabolical, there are so many parts where you could sort of pull over a bit and people would, leaving half a car sticking out thats going to send drivers into the middle lane and loads of bits where its totally unclear where you would go on foot for safety...disabled people...babies in car seats...pensioners.
They may not die..but what a unnecessary traumatic experience.
Half arsed thinking and a few corporate/government manslaughter cases should put and end to them.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
Why the facepalm @Yoni? I've been saying smart motorways are a fucking danger for years.

Because they are. It was always fucking obvious that if you remove the only safe space on a live-lane motorway that people would start getting hit like flies.

Motoring organisations have been up in arms since long before the rollout along with road safety campaigners and average joe.

What did they fucking think would happen? People are dying...
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
That says all you need to know.


They're not confusing. They're inherently dangerous.

Grant Shapps is just a Tory cunt who won't say "it's going to cost us a fuckton to make all our motorways 4-lane because we'd have to upgrade all the bridges - which is hella expensive - so we'd rather remove the hard shoulder and watch poor people who can't afford cars that don't break down die instead".
I mean its just common sense that if you break down in a live lane with the nearest refuge half a mile down the road you are in a more vulnerable position than if you could coast to a lane that people are not allowed to use. Sure that lane is hazardous but not as bad as a live lane.

it was just a cheaper way of adding more lanes. But tbh it takes ages to make them the m4 ones been in progress a few years and the m3 one took years to make.
 

Yoni

Cockb@dger / Klotehommel www.lhw.photography
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
5,020
Why the facepalm @Yoni? I've been saying smart motorways are a fucking danger for years.

Because they are. It was always fucking obvious that if you remove the only safe space on a live-lane motorway that people would start getting hit like flies.

Motoring organisations have been up in arms since long before the rollout along with road safety campaigners and average joe.

What did they fucking think would happen? People are dying...
Was an error and I have removed it ;)
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
Ah :)

Didn't need to remove. Just interested. Some people get properly het up with them.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
I tell ya what tho, I'd be looking to find the next bank in the worst white hick town I could find and dress like a hobo and try to deposit my next check.

Nice little earner, trolling white racists then suing them. I'd fully support him in that :)
The teller was black.
 

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
19,842
I love it when your car breaks down first thing in the morning...

So it makes a banging noise near the front right wheel arch and then when I drove it a bit further it started to smell of smoke etc.

It didn't appear to be a problem when reversing though!?

Any clue?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
I love it when your car breaks down first thing in the morning...

So it makes a banging noise near the front right wheel arch and then when I drove it a bit further it started to smell of smoke etc.

It didn't appear to be a problem when reversing though!?

Any clue?
It's something that can only be diagnosed by driving long miles on Smart Motorways.

If you break down on one of them I guarantee you won't worry about it any more ;)
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
The teller was black.
So? Even if true (I've not seen that anywhere, so source?) - the teller is a representative of the corporation. If the teller has acted on the basis that the customer is black (which is completely understandable) then the corporation is guilty of racist action.

You're very simplistic in your notions of what comprises racism and who or what can commit racist acts aren't you.

And don't say "no, I understand nuance perfectly" - because if you did you would have realised the utter meaninglessness of your statement and not posted it.
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
22,950
Decided to give up processed sugar for February.

There are eight Galaxy Ripple chocolate bars in the fridge. Leaving them there as a test of will power :eek7:

Today I will be mostly eating funny coloured things:

copy of froo.jpg
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,979
Celery is not food, tastes minging and takes more energy to digest than it actually gives you :eek:

But I cheer your reduction of processed sugar. Well done.

Analysis:
So all the fruit in your box is packed full of fructose (limes less so) - but it's not so bad because it comes packaged with fiber. Do not, ever, fall into the trap of making fucking "smoothies" out of it because you're basically making a sugar drink. Eating the fruit is a good thing.

I'm a week into hard keto - less than 20g/day of carbs of any variety. I've burned up all the glycogen (carb-based energy source) in my body and dropped 10lbs in the last week because 1g of glycogen comes packaged with 3/4g of water. It's stored in the muscles and liver and once it's gone, the water goes too - hence the 10lbs (probably only lost 1.5lbs of actual fat).

My weight loss'll be sensible now - 1.5lbs of fat a week (if I keep exercising so I don't lose lean muscle).

What I'm delighted about - in fact absolutely ecstatic about - is when you're on keto you lose your hunger. Almost completely. Hunger is a function of your body telling you you're low on carbohydrates/sugars. But I've been through the keto flu etc - and my body is preferentially setup to burn fat, not carbs.

As I'm fat - 13st 11 @ 6'2" - then I've got plenty for my body to get tucked into. Therefore no cravings, no hunger, no ravenousness. To be free of that is fucking brilliant. It's the thing I'd missed most about ultra-low-carb keto.

I got up at 8:30 yesterday. Made a black coffee. Went for a 5 hour bike ride in the sun, which turned rainy. Didn't eat a thing (wasn't hungry). Went round a mate's house for a cup of black tea (milk has sugars in it) and a chat. Got home. At 7:30pm we ate roast flat rib of beef with a generous helping of non-carby vegetables - broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower and a non-carby gravy. Was totally delicious :)

Today. I've had a 2-egg omlette with spinach, spring onion and avocado for breakfast. Not because I'm hungry but simply because I can.

Might walk to the shop in a mo to pick up some more salad to have with a little tuna and lime, drizzle of olive oil. Again - not because I'm hungry at all - but more because I fancy a walk to the shop as it's sunny out.


Carbs, my friend @Lamp, are a fucking PITA. Even from natural sources (though absolutely I'll be going back to them). Artificial carbs though? (including the bread we get from supermarkets, alongside chocolate bars etc) - just fucking dangerous.

Turn of last century the average brit consumed 3k of processed sugar per year. Turn of this century? - 120kg. And we wonder why diabetes is a problem.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
Sugar is bad in refined form. And your right with the smoothie stuff. But you know 100g of broccoli have 7g of carbs in it. So its not that low in carbs. Not close to bread and stuff obviously.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom