|
By popular demand posted:Just loving a lock apart? Without even a first date?
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
priznat posted:I watched a youtube recently about the most dangerous stretch of water in NA, basically a segment of a canal that is electrified to prevent asian carp from spreading into lake Michigan. If you fall in there the electricity will stop your heart and no one can come after you to rescue you.. Gonna need the link to that, op. Edit: think I found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aVqPHjvZ54 Edit 2: not a big fan of his gimmick!! Sirotan fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:"Safety third" isn't anti-OSHA, it's a recognition that if safety were the utmost priority you'd be home in bed and that "safety first" is frequently simply propaganda that pays lip service to safety rather than protecting it and leads people to let their guard down. Is this a joke article?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
Sirotan posted:Gonna need the link to that, op. Almost bailed 10 seconds in with the worst attempts at the chicago accent I've ever heard
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
By popular demand posted:Just loving a lock apart? Without even a first date? I can guarantee that LPL will really give a lock a lot of foreplay* before loving it apart. *trying a jiggler, setting the pins with some tension, pulling the core I know gently caress all about lock picking outside of watching his videos. Edit: he's not afraid to use some toys if needed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv5j8klfbK8 Uthor fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:35
|
|
|
Sirotan posted:Gonna need the link to that, op. Thats a 5 minute drive from here. Now I know where to kill myself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
ekuNNN posted:Crosspost from the Schadenfreude thread; Some XTREME truckfuckling Look at this noob bailing off a basic 50/50 grind smdh
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:47
|
|
|
Imagined posted:He's not a class traitor. He was never a worker to begin with. He's a loving opera singer with a communications degree who got into acting via modeling gigs on loving QVC and poo poo and has been cosplaying as a blue collar joe. He's Larry the Cable Guy but worse. He's about as blue collar as Don Jr wearing a trucker hat. Fun fact, I was on a local TV show about 10 years ago that was produced by a tiny local production company. The guy who owns the production company is super left/Bernie socialist, and he's hilarious and really good at making TV on a tight budget. He and Mike Rowe were good friends (and are still good friends) going back to the time when they both came up together on local TV in Mississippi/West Tennessee decades ago. Apparently I just missed running into Mike Rowe one day during production when he dropped by to see his friend. Even though they are diametrically opposed on politics they are still close.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
DiHK posted:Thats a 5 minute drive from here. Now I know where to kill Fixed
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
My employer is just totally unable to go one more day without having the annual in person management pep talks, but, 'RONA, so we're having it in smaller groups of 70, fully masked, in carefully spaced and staggered folding chairs, under a giant tent, outside, during a tropical storm
shame on an IGA fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:My employer is just totally unable to go one more day without having the annual in person management pep talks, but, 'RONA, so we're having it in smaller groups of 70 in carefully spaced and staggered folding chairs, under a giant tent, outside, during a tropical storm
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
I mean, they have managed to make covid the least immediate hazard of this event
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
ekuNNN posted:Crosspost from the Schadenfreude thread; Some XTREME truckfuckling This guy really hates these poles. Imagined posted:He's not a class traitor. He was never a worker to begin with. He's a loving opera singer with a communications degree who got into acting via modeling gigs on loving QVC and poo poo and has been cosplaying as a blue collar joe. He's Larry the Cable Guy but worse. He's about as blue collar as Don Jr wearing a trucker hat. He's a carpetbagger. You should hear his excuse for why it doesn't matter that an opera singer is acting as the spokesperson for the working class.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
I like his podcast but have never known or heard a single thing about him aside from that
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
Phuzun posted:Fixed Bungee jumping, senators get free jumps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:"Safety third" isn't anti-OSHA, it's a recognition that if safety were the utmost priority you'd be home in bed and that "safety first" is frequently simply propaganda that pays lip service to safety rather than protecting it and leads people to let their guard down. “Safety Third” was something we said at Burning Man because we acknowledged that we were doing poo poo on an extremely temporary basis, for a purely recreational purpose, and were all getting high as loving balls. Hell, the danger was kind of the point. Even then, once I was staff there we did as best we could to treat it like real work and make everything as safe as possible so that the folks in attendance could be walking around on 15 different drugs, think that there was real danger afoot because of all the fire and poo poo, and not actually end up dead. How this catch phrase went from a desert drug festival out into the greater culture is a complete mystery to me. Anyways, some forklift tag-out OSHA content... https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMJmbbpgS/
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:08
|
|
|
LanceHunter posted:How this catch phrase went from a desert drug festival out into the greater culture is a complete mystery to me. Elon Musk went to burning man
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:10
|
|
|
And a shitload of Elon Musk-wannabes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
Sirotan posted:Gonna need the link to that, op. Yup that was the one, agreed his gimmick sucked but that was in my recs for some reason. I did a halfhearted search for it and should have checked my view history in youtube I realize 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
priznat posted:Yup that was the one, agreed his gimmick sucked but that was in my recs for some reason. I did a halfhearted search for it and should have checked my view history in youtube I realize made it to "who let the carp out" and I'm out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:"Safety third" isn't anti-OSHA, it's a recognition that if safety were the utmost priority you'd be home in bed and that "safety first" is frequently simply propaganda that pays lip service to safety rather than protecting it and leads people to let their guard down. First responders, by nature of their jobs, have a different relationship when it comes to job safety, and is the only time a this questionable article comes close to correct. In the recent Behind the Bastards podcast on Jordan Peterson, Robert Evans discusses how a first responder (in his case I believe he's talking about a medic) needs to assess a situation, and the first step is ensuring that you will be as safe as possible while dealing with whatever the problem is in order to avoid adding to the amount of people who need help. So while going into a burning building is not advisable, making sure you're doing it as safely as possible is the main priority so that way the next responders on the scene don't need to have to rescue you as well. To be fair, this is addressed in the article (and sort of by Rowe) as "getting the job done" but doing it as safely as possible, which is still addressing the need for safety on a job. Their second thing over safety is "Have Fun". Rowe's is "Money". That's just ignorance. On the other hand, in nearly every other job, worker safety should take precedence. I work in the contstruction industry. In no way when we are unloading slabs of stone or driving forklifts or whatever else we might be doing should "Having Fun" or "Money" be prioritized over safety. For that matter I wouldn't prioritize getting the job done over worker safety either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
LifeSunDeath posted:made it to "who let the carp out" and I'm out. I have realized I give youtubers wayyyy more leeway if they have a classy british accent, like the mega projects guy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
 Throw up ya hornz 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
priznat posted:I have realized I give youtubers wayyyy more leeway if they have a classy british accent, like the mega projects guy. Really? There are two main lessons that you take away after spending even a little bit of time watching Brits on youtube... 1. The aura of intelligence that we assume when we hear a British accent is a lie 2. Every British youtuber thinks they should be on the BBC, and the fact that they aren't is proof of that institution's corruption.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:On the other hand, in nearly every other job, worker safety should take precedence. I work in the contstruction industry. In no way when we are unloading slabs of stone or driving forklifts or whatever else we might be doing should "Having Fun" or "Money" be prioritized over safety. But it is. It would be safer for you to not be unloading slabs of stone. It would be safer for me not to be flying on a helicopter. But those things are the job, and at some point you are satisfied that "We're doing this safely" and you proceed to do your job for money. quote:So while going into a burning building is not advisable, making sure you're doing it as safely as possible is the main priority so that way the next responders on the scene don't need to have to rescue you as well. How is that different from any other task? Hauling around huge slabs of stone is not a thing which people do for its own sake, it is not entertainment. It's a job, and you make sure you're doing it as safely as possible, but no matter how safe you can possibly make it it will still be more dangerous than just letting huge slabs of stone stay in the ground and not hauling them around. We take the utmost effort to operate the helicopter as safely as possible, operating the helicopter as safely as possible is the main priority, but it is a helicopter, and not flying a helicopter is safer than flying a helicopter as safely as possible. But those things are the job.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:54
|
|
|
LanceHunter posted:Really? There are two main lessons that you take away after spending even a little bit of time watching Brits on youtube... It’s nothing to do with intelligence it just seems more interesting somehow. I am fascinated by accents though. Give me a new zealander doing videos on something I’m about and HELL YES.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 18:59
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:But it is. It would be safer for you to not be unloading slabs of stone. It would be safer for me not to be flying on a helicopter. But those things are the job, and at some point you are satisfied that "We're doing this safely" and you proceed to do your job for money. Safety First means that I can't find a way of doing the job safely, it's not getting done. If I put finishing the job ahead of worker safety and someone gets hurt, I deserve whatever fines and punishments that OSHA (as I'm in the US) dish out. You're taking the idea of Safety First to an absurd degree to be able to discount it's importance. By saying "It's safer to not handle slabs at all" you're setting up both a black and white fallacy. It's not "Unload slabs and get crushed or don't pull stone out of the ground". Rather, it's "Unload slabs while taking any and all precautions necessary to ensure it's done safely". It's "Don't cut corners safety-wise to do something quickly (saving money) or easily (getting the job done)" not "don't do anything ever". Getting the job done, making money, and being happy do not take precedence over the safety of the worker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
i hope the next time i'm in a plane the captain doesn't think 'well it's unsafe to be so far up in the sky anyways so let's YOLO this motherfucker!'
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
EngineLabs, an Engine builder magazine, shared this photo on Facebook: Its an LS motor swapped into a kit made to look like a P-51. The thing about aircraft engines, especially for small aircraft, is that they don't produce a ton of power, but they do so reliably and generally have different metallurgy and max RPMs versus their road going cousin. Most 4 stroke aircraft engines run more like 2 strokes, but can do so for hundreds of hours without issue. That's where we get to this photo: Engine Labs shared this talking about the famous, power making LS. The trick is, this plane, this exact one, crashed from loss of power and, subsequently, loss of control. Because just slapping a dry-sumped car engine into your plane probably isn't a great idea. And the FAA will license nearly ANY motor in an Expirimental aircraft as long as it meets minimums. https://www.planecrashmap.com/plane/nd/N116LK/ CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
Are Fort Ransom and Buttzville real place names or is that crashmap site loving with me
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:Safety First means that I can't find a way of doing the job safely, it's not getting done. What does "safely" mean? It doesn't mean "with zero risk," because if it did then your job would not get done. "Safely' in that sentence there means "with a degree of risk you (I mean you personally) consider acceptable under the circumstances." quote:If I put finishing the job ahead of worker safety and someone gets hurt, I deserve whatever fines and punishments that OSHA (as I'm in the US) dish out. Doing a job in all accord with OSHA regulations doesn't that you're doing that job as safely as it is possible do do it, it just means that you're meeting the standards that OSHA has decided on. Those standards might (and frequently do) suck. Like, what if you're doing a job in accord with OSHA regulations and someone still gets hurt? That doesn't mean the injury was unavoidable or unforeseeable or that the Venn diagrams of "OSHA regulations" and "good practices" are in unity. quote:You're taking the idea of Safety First to an absurd degree to be able to discount it's importance. By saying "It's safer to not handle slabs at all" you're setting up both a black and white fallacy. It's not "Unload slabs and get crushed or don't pull stone out of the ground". Rather, it's "Unload slabs while taking any and all precautions necessary to ensure it's done safely". No, the black-and-white fallacy is that a job is either being done safely or unsafely. Safe/unsafe is not a binary condition, it is a continuum with degrees. It is always possible to make a thing safer by spending more money, or by spending more time, but you asymptotically approach "job doesn't get done." It *is* safer to not handle slabs at all. We have policies and regulations on how to move slabs in order to reduce the risk. I guarantee the OSHA regulations regarding moving stone slabs do not include "all precautions necessary to ensure it's done safely." They include precautions that reduce risk an a level acceptable to OSHA. Your workplace might include additional precautions that reduce the risk to a level acceptable to your workplace. And when you go to do the job you do it if those risks have been reduced to a level acceptable to you. But there are other precautions you could take to reduce the risk even further, and you don't take those additional precautions because the present level of risk is already acceptable to you. quote:It's "Don't cut corners safety-wise to do something quickly (saving money) or easily (getting the job done)" not "don't do anything ever". You're at work, you're moving a slab, I'll stipulate that you're doing it safely. You're following all the rules, regulations, policies. If you were to cut corners and increase the risk to get the job done faster or cheaper that would be bad. But you could also make more corners: it might cost more money, or take more time, but you could operate under other processes which reduce the risk to a smaller level then the way you're moving slabs today. So why don't you? Phanatic fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Oct 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
Please don't engage Phanatic, just tell them that they are very smart and special and they figured it out. Good job Phanatic! You are correct! Meanwhile: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:No, the black-and-white fallacy is that a job is either being done safely or unsafely. Safe/unsafe is not a binary condition, it is a continuum with degrees. It is always possible to make a thing safer by spending more money, or by spending more time, but you asymptotically approach "job doesn't get done." It *is* safer to not handle slabs at all. We have policies and regulations on how to move slabs in order to reduce the risk. I guarantee the OSHA regulations regarding moving stone slabs do not include "all precautions necessary to ensure it's done safely." They include precautions that reduce risk an a level acceptable to OSHA. Your workplace might include additional precautions that reduce the risk to a level acceptable to your workplace. And when you go to do the job you do it if those risks have been reduced to a level acceptable to you. But there are other precautions you could take to reduce the risk even further, and you don't take those additional precautions because the present level of risk is already acceptable to you. You started this conversation defending Mike Rowe's saying "Safety comes behind Getting the job done and money". There are agreed upon guidelines in order to do a job safely. These guidelines cannot be pushed aside to "get the job done" or to make money. This is the crux of "Safety First". Rowe doesn't like OSHA because they say "Hey, you have to be safe while doing your job. Set up a proper scaffold instead of working off of a bucket." OSHA standards get written because people get hurt. They don't write them for shits and giggles, they write them because some poor roofer walked off of a roof and died because his boss didn't provide fall protection. And you have said "Doing something is inherently unsafe, it is safer not to do it" This is setting up a black or white fallacy. You're saying you can do something that is unsafe or not do it. Any reasonable reading of "safety first" is going to accept that there is a risk in crossing the street. It is unreasonable to assume that people aren't going to cross a street due to the risk of getting hit by a car. It is reasonable to say "Safety first" and wait until traffic is clear before doing it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Are Fort Ransom and Buttzville real place names or is that crashmap site loving with me There is a Fort Ransom (with a state park) in North Dakota. Not far from the small town (Nome) that a nazi tried to fill with other racists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
Stop replying to phantic's "oh you do the job so you truly don't care about safety." Idk why people still bite on their poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
Shut the gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
Wrr posted:Which part of Fallen London involves a truck doing a sick move to launch light poles at opposing traffic? Liberation of the Night The worst of all factions in the Ealing Gardens. Only less truck and more train.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:You started this conversation defending Mike Rowe's saying "Safety comes behind Getting the job done and money". Rowe is talking about *employers* when he says that. The entire point is that employers claim that safety is their top priority but that they are more concerned with money.: "When a business tells you that they are more concerned with your safety than anything else, beware. They are not being honest. They are hedging their own bets, and following the advice of lawyers hired to protect them from lawsuits arising from accidents." He is saying that while employers may say "Safety First," their policies (and OSHA regulations, for that matter), are tradeoffs between safety measures and their financial costs and benefits. Is there anyone here, in this group of all places, who disagrees with that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 20:26
|
|