The other thread got me wondering about what youtube channels you lads can recommend. Topic can be anything, just what you find to be good and interesting to watch.
Learning:
>Issac Arthur
I posted one of his videos awhile ago but it's well worth repeating. Every Thursday he does a really interesting and in-depth look at science and futurism concepts and does a really good job of explaining them simply but also covering the unnoticed drawbacks and benefits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7fLNvpl0c8
>ElectroBOOM
He has kind of gone to shit over the past few months but this is still a good channel for basic electrical engineering fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7foDiXX-CcE
>Tom Scott
Mostly for his 'Things You Might Not Know' series. He goes over some pretty interesting things that you might never notice but are all around us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm5khEUIBx0
>Rare & Unfamiliar Music Hunt
Rare albums from around the world and probably your best sauce for classic Afrobeat and the sounds of the former Eastern Bloc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsnG0P8v_5E
>Du Matin au Soir
Mostly ambient, minimalist and experimental albums. It's good if you're doing a bit of work and don't want to sit in silence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-XbRaRR6jA
I've been trying to see if there's anything I can do to salvage a suit jacket from the after effects of an attack by some mediterranean salad, and usually I wouldn't post a random video I found during my search. However, I feel the need to highlight how powerful this lad's jaw looks. Kissing him might actually be dangerous, and I'd wager he could rob your bike without the aid of a pair of wire cutters.
The money-worshipping shitcunts are starting to ruin CDs just like they have ruined vinyl. At the moment, it's just very rare and very niche CDs. But the way this is shaping up, pretty soon you could be paying £50 for a bog standard used Radiohead or Duran Duran CD.
If you collect CDs only as an investment, then you deserve to go deaf instantly for the rest of your life. Just take your fucking money and drive other things up in price, but not CDs which just last year you were turning up your nose at because they didn't promise profits like vinyl.
>>25778 I don't collect a damn thing myself, but I do feel bad for people like yourself who this happens to. The time between earnest collectors and enjoyers emerging and half-wits with business degrees, ruining it all with speculative pricing seems to be getting shorter, no matter what you decide to collect. I imagine the half-wits would lecture you about the "free market" and "supply and demand" if you pulled them up on it too, the pricks.
This pursuit of profit destroys any collecting hobby. Because before long, not only will those who actually enjoy and appreciate something for its own sake be priced out of buying and owning it, by people who have no true regard for that something, but it will pretty much become unusable for its actual intended purpose. Are you really going to listen to a CD every other day, take it out of its case, handle it, and put it in your CD player, if a superficial scratch to it can mean it loses 500 quid in value?
Right now, a sealed-in-cellophane, U.S.-style longbox of Use Your Illusion II by Guns N' Roses can pop up on eBay for over $200. I just checked. It goes without saying that that CD will never be opened or played. It will disappear into some rich cunt's vault in the hope that they'll be able to sell it for five times that amount in the future. While its fitness for use would normally be exactly the same as my copy of Use Your Illusion II that I bought new in 1994 for £10 and which I still enjoy listening to on a regular basis.
In our world where everything gets monetised to any extreme possible, it would probably be naive to think that CDs would be safe in the long run. There was a time about 20 or 30 years ago when literally nobody wanted vinyl and you could indiscriminately buy an entire tub full of records by popular artists at a flea market for £10. In the near future, very realistically CDs could take on the same trajectory as vinyl. Your mum's used CD of Take That's Greatest Hits will probably never be worth more than £10 unless it's a rare misprint. But if you're a true fan of CDs and music on that format that's a bit more rare, then you could have to get used to paying anywhere from £100 to £300 for it.
I sometimes like to fantasise about what I'd do if I won the lottery, or had some long lost relative leave me millions out of nowhere, as we all do I am sure.
One of the things I'd do would be buying old and highly valued "untouched" electric guitars, things like mint condition '58 Les Pauls or '54 Stratocasters that will go for literally hundreds of thousands- And just playing them. Treating them roughly like I would any of my other instruments. Jamming out to some AC/DC and letting my sweat soak into the delicate aged nitrocellulose lacquer. Letting my finger grease get all ground into the grain of the fretboard. Scratching the top with overly aggressive pick swings. Hanging it up without cleaning it off.
In a way it would be a really decadent thrill to get something really expensive and devalue it like that. But mostly it's just to make the point that fuck off, these things should not be valued like this. They're made to be used and enjoyed. A handful should be preserved as museum pieces, perhaps, but not in the hands of private collectors who have no interest beyond their value. I would drink the salty tears of the dentists and lawyers who I would have deprived of an investment opportunity.
What a completely uninformative waste of time. The only bit of data in that entire video is the prices for cod and chips around grismby. Zero meaningful explaination or exploration of the economic and social forces involved. I'm not even sure if the "half british fish and chips shops faces closures" is even a remotely factual statement after watching it, because it feels like just alarmist click bait. If there is a real concern do real journalism. Jesus fuck, I long for the boring informative journalism of the past.
>>25786 >>25787 I just jumped to a random part of the video and there's a chippy owner saying that it costs him a fiver for the fish, which is why a large fish and chips costs £11.60, and that deliveries through third-party costs him 20% of a sale.
Maybe you pair just need to listen more closely and spend less time on TikTok.
I'm not either of those lads, but the whole thing is terribly uninformative.
Firstly, the whole Grimsby fish market thing. The majority of chip shops don't sell cod or haddock, they sell "fish" - invariably basa, a freshwater shark farmed in Vietnam. It's less than half the price of haddock, 70% cheaper than cod and most people can't tell the difference. Chip shops occasionally get prosecuted for selling basa as cod, when local trading standards can be arsed to do DNA testing. Obviously a farmed fish from south-east Asia has precisely fuck-all to do with the North Sea, and obviously nobody in the industry wants to talk about it.
For the British fishing industry, the key issue is still quotas; we might be out of the EU, but we're still negotiating quotas with them. Most of the English quotas (and essentially all of the whitefish quotas) have been sold to foreign firms, because for most operators it's more profitable to sell your quota than to actually catch fish.
In terms of the cost pressures on chip shops, the main issue is payroll costs. That's something reflected across the whole of hospitality and catering, with nearly 100,000 job losses over the last year. Minimum wage is now £12.21; the changes to National Insurance have been particularly acutely felt for employers with a high proportion of low-wage and part-time workers. Chip shops are already operating on fairly minimal staffing levels, so their only real option to cut their wage bill is to reduce opening hours. Many of their takeaway competitors don't really have to deal with those issues, because they're hiring illegal immigrants and paying them cash-in-hand.
Most chip shops use gas ranges; they're paying through the nose for gas because of the effects of the Ukraine war on the gas market. They could potentially switch to electric ranges, but that would be more expensive due to the uniquely dysfunctional nature of the British electricity market. Perversely, about a quarter of your electricity bill is made up of environmental taxes and subsidies which don't apply to gas, so our policies are actively disincentivising people from using clean energy.
Lazy journalism aside, I think it's fairly obvious why The Guardian would avoid talking about those thorny, ideologically-charged issues and instead put out a pretty vapid piece that doesn't really get to the bottom of anything. "Rachel Reeves is killing the Great British Chippy" really isn't their style, even if it has a substantial element of truth.
>Lazy journalism aside, I think it's fairly obvious why The Guardian would avoid talking about those thorny, ideologically-charged issues and instead put out a pretty vapid piece that doesn't really get to the bottom of anything.
I'm not Reformlad, but you can't help the faint thought in the back of your head that this is what happens when DEI trumps qualification. Not sure what reporterlad needs his walking aid for, but maybe it helped him get the job.
Why is traditional fishing even still a thing anyway? It'd be like if the joint on your sunday roast still came from a game hunter. Nobody is after wild beef or pork, and nobody except vego-fascists cares that we raise animals solely for the purpose of meat.
Surely fish should all be farmed and we can leave the ocean alone. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you can breed and harvest fish way faster than any land based livestock, and we could all just eat more salmon and tuna and such to cut back on beef. After all, even the vego-fash don't consider fish to have feelings. Perfect solution until we get that lab grown meat thing sorted the missing link is that it can't taste good if it hasn't experienced suffering. There must be a god because this is his cruel ironic sense of humour being demonstrated to us.
Anyway I've not been to a chippy in ages. I buy those frozen Youngs battered fillets. Couple of those in a soft white roll, slathered with salt vinegar and ketchup, better fish butty than any chippy has ever done me. I just think it's a sad reality that the humble chip shop might be an economically outdated institution, like Poundland.
I really can't be arsed with another economics cunt off with you lot but you are making the results fit your hypothesis here, honestly. Sure staffing costs are going to put more pressure on businesses which might already be making slim margins, but putting it in front of energy costs is definitely getting it backwards.
Prices at pubs and chippies etc all rocketed exactly alongside Putin's invasion of Ukraine the subsequent cut of Russian gas imports. That's direct cause and effect, and that was way back before even the last Tory government desperately reached for the minimum wage lever as a last resort in its dying gasps to claim growth. Besides that, plenty of chip shops do use illegals and do pay cash in hand, so I don't know why you are singling them apart from the kebab and pizza places. They're the same kettle of fish.
I know you just wanted to have a go at Rachel from Accounts but there's plenty of other valid ways to do that.
It's not about having an economics cunt off its about the fact that the guardians level of information is 12 minutes of people saying "I like fish and chips but its expensive" without going to the effort of explaining why.
I've watched probably close to a dozen of this guy's videos now, and it's enough to be almost certain he has a crossdressing kink. Good old fashioned crossdressing though, not the stupid modern kind where everyone will try and tell you you must be trans within five minutes.
Anyway I'd definitely fuck him, and indeed let him fuck me, especially if he wore a skirt and some fluffy ears. He's got the kind of physique furries have in gay furry porn, but only about 0.0035% of real life lads have.
>>25801 This guy is such a fag, I love it. Led me to the above video, cheers.
>>25803 >it's enough to be almost certain he has a crossdressing kink
>Shaved body
>experience walking in heels
>owns a clearly practices on a fucking portable stripper pole
Lol, you think?
I wouldn't say it is that uncommon. The most notable things about him is that he has a low body fat. Otherwise it is a quite normal body shape. He is obviously muscular, but not wildly so.
This is within the rage of most young men to achieve. Of course most men aren't doing the level of effort required to reach and maintain that shape so I can see why you would in practical terms consider it rare.
The difference is he's very slender, almost effeminate, but still masculine-ly proportioned. Most lads are only like this if they are skinny, and as soon as they put in any effort to tone the muscle, they become bulky and inelegant.
Like when you toggle between body type 1 and body type 2 in a videogame with a character creator. You can pick buff or slinky, but this guy is buff and slinky.
>as soon as they put in any effort to tone the muscle, they become bulky and inelegant
you are misusing the term tone when you mean putting on muscle and getting fat.
His body is perfectly normal in an athlete or in a squady. it's just most guys you are describing hit the weights in gym and pour more junk food then before down their gullet. The difference here is this guy is actually doing cardio and balancing their diet.
I'm not sure why you are so intent on arguing with this statement but I've had 35 years of experience in knowing what men look like, and all I am saying is very few of them look like this. Even athletes and people who should have that body shape for the reasons you state, frequently don't. It's very uncommon to see.
>>25813 Why are you arguing with gaylad as to whether or not you or he have seen more blokes in the buff? The fucking wood elf in that video is moving around like Spiderman, he's not just skinny with good cardio. He's built more like a ballet dancer than anything you just listed, which is a very particular kind of physique, and not one you get from going on hikes or being shouted at by an serjeant in a bearskin hat.
The funny thing about it is that this is why I'm not gay. I'd be into guys if more guys had this kind of build, but as it is I only ever see it in the extremely idealised forms of fetishised anthropomorphic canines.
But this is one of those internet things isn't it. Where you say "I like thing" and people go "no you don't, you like other thing." and you go "... What?"
>>25815 I wasn't even trying to make fun of you by calling you gaylad. When you said you had "35 years of experience", I legitimately thought you were making an oblique reference to having been shagging other men for that long.
I recently learned of this guy from some breadtuber shitting on him running for congress a second time, after losing the first time by 650 votes. He does gun stuff, including building guns. But he's also someone who obviously grew up with 4chan /k/, because he's very shitposty. 4.05M subscribers so he's pretty big.
He's charismatic and quite funny, and I think overall he's likeable. I'm not a huge gun autist, but I find a lot of his stuff interesting even. He's also very palatable as far as right wingers go.
>>25819 As much as I'd love to cosplay that Fallout looking masterpiece in the thumbnail, having saved images and embedded link trails is probably enough to get you on a list, this day and age.
I can't watch that m8, not without 7 proxxies - and then it'd invite trouble.
> Forgotten Weapons
No nonsense videos dissecting specific guns from throughout history leaning towards lesser known guns or lesser known versions of otherwise well known ones. A more abt channel name would be "History of Guns".
&t
> C&Rsenal
Very interesting long form videos explainng the complete history of particular guns explaining the complete history, from initial design to eventual production, with a heavy focus on guns at least 100 years old, and a more or less strict cutoff of 1945. Best enjoyed via their curated playlists ("Primer: Small Arms History" is excellent, and at 215 usually 1h+ videos will last you a while).
The problem with GunTube is every time I watch even one video on some unique and interesting weapon, The Algorithm it instantly assumes I'm one of those full /k/ autists and fills my feed with Hickock45 and Paul Harrell. I don't mind either of those, and as far as Yank gun nuts go, they are pretty good examples. But I'm not that into guns. I like a bit of gun knowledge, but I have no interest in just watching somebody shoot stuff.
VR is the place to go for gun fun. I bet every Brit who bought H3VR on Steam is on a watch list (or recruitment list, knowing the GCHQ lot).
As a general moan, YouTube has been hard at work for years now to make removing recommendations a right ball ache.
I've been subbed to those (>>25822) two channels long enough and steadfastly ignoring recommendations so that the algorithm has given up recommending other gun related channels, fortunately. It still tries from time to time with hunting channels which I have absolutely no interest in.
Probably well known (pure conjecture on my part), but the default(1) algorithm latches on to "high value" category views and as soon as it notices you dipping your toe into one of those categories it will bombard you with more of that category until it notices a new category you might like or until it eventually cools off and either tries HV categories you've watched before, picks one related to previous views, or tries a random one to see if it can draw you in.
1) You can still switch the recommendations column to "Related", which is close to the (very) old behaviour of showing actually related content.
>>25825 I watched it last night only because I wanted something on while I was exercising. Not because I don't like RLM, but I couldn't give a toss about Star Wars. Now it would seem Mr Plinkett agrees with me. No idea what took him so long.
>>>/pol/102733 Thank you for posting that link in that thread. The channel contains other videos which also analyse why YouTube is getting so shit, and indeed even has videos about why other things are shit too. Given how much shitness I consistently witness everywhere I look, it's nice to see it addressed and explained.
>>25835 I don't know why but this was funny. The weakest bit was flattening out the soaked card. The smoking water was quite funny.
The channel is also quite good - EverythingNowShow! It's mostly improv comedy with a lot of filler, but there's some really good skits in there. Check the very first joke from this stream - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXqwn0H8CpI - I'd love to try something like this myself, looks great fun.
Where was that recent YT tag explaination, one of the weekday threads?
