.jpg.5dd7eafac1c5560cee1c21e218b983b7.jpg)
zoran59
-
Posts
1,811 -
Joined
Posts posted by zoran59
-
-
Jopet secanja.
Bio pre par dana u servisu kolima, kupio nove gume. Sedim, cekam, pa idu misli oko guma...
Elem, druga polovina '70-ih. Jos 4. godina gimnazije. Raspomamili se drugar i ja, A kategorija vozacke vise nije ogranicena na 125 kubika nego kad napunis 18 mozes da vozis sta hoces. Odmah po MZ 250, ima ih novih a moze i na kredit. Nisam bio kreditno sposoban, naravno, pa je umesto banke uskocila moja majka - a ja pomalo zaradjivao trgujuci delovima i praveci te prodavajuci neke delove od fiberglasa, pa joj otplacivao.
Ma, dopizdilo. Jeste MZ fin, ali nije to "motorcina" i ja kupim Triumph 650 Thunderbird iz '61. A moj drugar misli "ne's ti mene zajebavat" i odmah nadje Triumph 650, ali "noviji" - iz '63.
I dodje meni da ga sredimo. Izmedju ostalog, trule gume, straznja poderana skoro do platna.
To u Jugoslaviji, nema delova ili opreme za neke "zapadne luksuze." Ode on autobusom u Trst i kupi gume. Njegov motor kod mene u radionici, pa on dodje da ih montiramo - i kao pravi drugar, donese i 6 flasa piva.
Pocnemo normalno. Skinemo tocak, pazljivo maknemo staru gumu i krenemo da stavimo novu. Ej, stara bila neka nepoznata marka a nova najskuplji Dunlop.
Al' zbog necega ne ide. O's pajser, o's srafciger, o's 'vakvu il' 'nakvu polugu, ne ide.
I ode 6 piva.
Ode on (trgovina iza coska) po jos 6.
Popijemo jos par piva, mucimo se k'o Isus na krstu, pizdimo i psujemo - i, bog te ne heb'o, stavimo gumu na tocak.
Samo, nikako da "sedne" - tj. da dodje na ivice tocka, nego sedi stisnuta u sredini.
Ma, daj jos jedno pivo, sa'cu ja to.
Odgodimo, vec pijani, sve do sutra. Sta je mnogo, mnogo je.
Dodje on ujutru da nastavimo i zavrsimo.
I vidimo: montirali smo 18-colsku gumu na 19-colski tocak! U procesu, sjebali i gumu i felnu, trebalo je sve novo.
Naravoucenije: ne mesaj pivo i promenu gume!
-
1
-
9
-
-
1. Quartararo
2. Vinales
3. Miller
-
44 minutes ago, boxcube said:
...................
Ne bih o istini preterano sa osobom koja ne ume da izvede logicke posledice tudjih replika i svojih odgovora na te replike, ali samo da kazem da u ovom konkretnom slucaju nisi pokazao/dokazao da Tramp laze nego da iznosi neistine. Posto ne mozemo videti sta Tramp zapravo veruje jedino sto sigurno mozemo znati je da je izneo nestinu ali ne i da je lagao. Kada bi imali negde gde primer da kaze jedno pa drugo pri cemu znamo sta je tacno e onda je to primer koji pokazuje da laze.
....................
Btw, ja znam da Tramp laze, vise puta sam se uverio u to.
....................
Neverovatno!
Recimo da si u pravu, tj. (posto ne znamo sta neko misli) da je nekakva razlika izmedju laganja i "iznosenja neistina" u tome sto je svesno i namerno "iznosenje neistina laganje, a nesvesno (zbog neznanja) samo "obicno neiznosenje istina." Tako sam rasumeo tvoj post.
Ne bih se ovde upustao u epistemologiju.
Covek je javna licnost sa ogromnim uticajem na gomilu drugih, njegove reci imaju drustvene posledice i sasvim je nevazno poreklo njegovih lazi - vazne su samo posledice. Ja sam praktican covek.
BTW, kako si se ti uverio i znas da laze - posto kazes da ja ne znam razliku? Pomozi mi da shvatim.
Dalje, mogli bi se prepucavati YouTube klipovima, ima ih sa svih strana, no meni su relelevatniji izvori izvestaji ozbiljnih institucija (pa i vladinih/drzavnih) nego YT kanali opskurnih desnicarskih ekstremista. Ovo sto si okacio moze da bude zanimljivo da se vidi, ali nije osnov za ozbiljnu raspravu.
Uostalom, ne treba da gubis vreme odgovarajuci meni jer sam neozbiljan, neinformiran i glup.
Odgovori nekome ko (samo mozda?) zna vise...
By David Leonhardt
Domestic terrorism
Three years ago, the polling firm YouGov asked Americans whether they thought it could ever be justified for their political party to use violence to advance its goals. The overwhelming response was no. Only 8 percent of people said anything other than “never.”
This year, YouGov asked the same question — and the share saying that political violence could be somewhat justified roughly doubled. The increase spanned both Democratic and Republican respondents.
I thought of that alarming finding yesterday, after law enforcement officials charged 13 men with a violent plot that included storming the Michigan State Capitol and kidnapping Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Conservative groups have criticized Whitmer for her attempts to control the coronavirus by restricting normal activities. In April, President Trump tweeted, “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!”
Yesterday’s arrests are the latest evidence that a small but meaningful number of Americans believe that violence is the only answer to the country’s political divisions. “We’re seeing more and more citizens expressing openness to violence as more and more partisan leaders engage in the kinds of dehumanizing rhetoric that paves the way for taking violent action,” Lee Drutman, one of the political scientists who oversaw the YouGov poll, told me.
Since May, more than 50 people have driven vehicles into peaceful protesters. Armed protesters shut down the Michigan legislature in May. Armed groups on the left and right have done battle in Oregon and Wisconsin. Extremists have attacked journalists, including an instance in Brooklyn on Wednesday night.
“Political violence in democracies often seems spontaneous: an angry mob launching a pogrom, a lone shooter assassinating a president,” Rachel Kleinfeld of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace recently wrote in The Washington Post. “But in fact, the crisis has usually been building for years.” She added, “This is where America is now.”
It’s important to note that the problem is bipartisan — and also that it is not equally bad on both sides: The American right today has a bigger violence problem than the American left. Of the 42 killings by political extremists last year, right-wing extremists committed 38, according to the Anti-Defamation League.
And top Republican politicians have encouraged violence in ways no prominent Democrat has. Greg Gianforte, a Republican congressman now running to be Montana’s governor, pleaded guilty to assaulting a reporter who asked a question he didn’t like in 2017.
Trump, for his part, has encouraged violence against protesters at his rallies and has often refused to condemn violent white-supremacist groups, including during last week’s debate. Whitmer, speaking after the arrests yesterday, cited that debate: “Hate groups heard the president’s words not as a rebuke, but as a rallying cry, a call to action,” she said.
Political scientists emphasize that the drift toward violence is not inevitable. When political leaders denounce violence, it often influences public opinion, research suggests. These denouncements are especially effective when leaders — or individuals — criticize their own side for engaging in violence. Condemning the other side is easy.
“Outbreaks of political violence are a real threat,” Brendan Nyhan, a government professor at Dartmouth, has written. “Every person of good faith in either party must speak up.”
For more on Michigan: The Detroit News reported that some of the plot’s conspirators met during a Second Amendment rally at the Michigan State Capitol in June. And one expert told The Detroit Free Press that Michigan “has always been a hotbed for militia activity.”Sumnjam da ces procitati citat. Ali ga kacim jer mozda neko drugi bude zainteresovan.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Veshtodel said:
................
Dakle, ako hocemo da analiziramo BLM i generalno USA, uopste nije potrebno da zivimo u toj zemlji i da imamo subjektivnog iskustva i godine zivota da bismo to uradili. Nasi izvori informacija mogu biti skroz indirektni, pa cak i apstraktni i teorijski, kao recimo informacije koje astrofizicari imaju o crnim rupama u udaljenim galaksijama, a da nisu mrdnuli iz grada u kom zive i rade, vec to znanje grade sa olovkom i papirom na kom pisu matematicke formule o crnim rupama i slicnim sistemima.
Sve 5. Samo, niko od nas, u ovakvoj situaciji, nema vremena za sve izvore informacija istovremeno. Ali ziveci ovde, lajem sa komsijama, pa jedan od nas prati Fox, drugi CNN a treci CBS itd., jedan cita Time a drugi Newsweek - dok neko ziveci drugde izabere jedan ili max. dva izvora pa donosi zakljucke.
Trudim se da baratam cinjenicama i donosim sopstvene zakljucke.
Primer.
U USA je od coronavirusa umrlo 215 hiljada ljudi, prema zvanicnim podacima - oko toga se svi slazu.
Ali negde pise "samo toliko, a bez Trumpa bi bilo mnogo vise!"
A drugde "cak toliko, a bez Trumpa je moglo biti manje od pola toga!"
Pokusavam da iz oba izvora prihvatim samo informaciju o cifri, a onda poredim sa situacijom u drugim drzavama, razmislim o drugim demografskim/goeografskim/sistemskim itd. razlikama i mogucim uzrocima, pa donesem svoj zakljucak.
Ovde cesto imamo primere da forumasi selektivno pogledaju izvore informacija koji su im ideoloski bliski pa prenose njihove zakljucke.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, A sad said:
Pens ponovo sjajan. Ubedljivo je dobio debatu. ................
Pa, zavisi koga pitas. Ankete pokazuju da su utisci "navijacki" - pripadnici stranki redom misle da je "njihov" kandidat bio bolji.
Oboje su izbegavali da direktno i jasno odgovore na neka pitanja, a Pence je i iritirao prekoracujuci vreme.
Jedna pristojna analiza je ovde:
Who Won the Vice Presidential Debate Between Pence and Harris? Analysis and Highlights
Who Won the Vice Presidential Debate Between Pence and Harris? Analysis and Highlights
In his Wednesday night debate with Senator Kamala Harris, Vice President Mike Pence defended Donald Trump as ably as anyone could, given that the resurgent COVID-19 crisis, which Pence is in charge of handling, meant that the debate had to be conducted with plexiglass dividers.
But it's likely that nothing Pence said threatened former Vice President Joe Biden's lead. And nothing he did dislodged a determined fly from his head where it landed—and stayed—for nearly two minutes as he championed the Trump administration's support for law enforcement.
The fly was the elephant in the room, as it were: a reminder that no matter how strongly Pence portrayed the administration through its accomplishments, it's impossible to ignore the missteps.
Harris and Pence's 90-minute debate at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City was the calm after the storm that was the debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden. Both wanted more time to address voters during their one and only debate, but they kept the interruptions to a minimum, although they argued over what constituted a "fact."
Harris scored in finding an opportunity to share her personal story as the daughter of a Jamaican father and Indian mother. She also avoided moments that would make it easy to dismiss her as an "angry Black woman" or "unlikeable"—unfair but unavoidable standards that a woman, and especially a woman of color, probably had to meet.
Throughout the night, Pence consistently championed the Trump administration as being fighters for the American people and defended their much-criticized response to the new coronavirus pandemic by asserting, basically, that it could have been worse. Pence leads the administration's coronavirus task force, so criticism of Trump's response ultimately falls on him.
Along with pressuring Harris into answering whether Biden would pack the Supreme Court—a question she didn't answer—Pence was a master at the art of redirection. Even in seemingly unrelated segments, Pence brought the conversation back to the financial impact a Biden administration would have on the everyday American.
Pence hit Harris for her long-standing support of the Green New Deal, saying it would "bury" the economy and pointed to mandates it would put on Americans at a time when some are feeling frustrated at restrictions that were implemented by the new coronavirus. He also hammered the argument that Biden would ban fracking, thereby putting people out of work, and repeal Trump's tax cut that Pence told voters put more money in Americans' pockets.
Harris didn't argue her support for the Green New Deal, but said at least twice that Biden will not "end fracking." While she disagreed with much of what Pence had to say during the debate, her staunchest opposition was to his comments about Biden's plan for Americans' taxes.
"That's not what I said," Harris retorted when Pence commented that moments earlier, she said Biden would raise taxes. Biden, she said, had been "very clear" that he wouldn't raise taxes except on those who make over $400,000 a year. It's a move that may bode well for Harris, as only an estimated one or two percent of Americans fall within that bracket, so voters who were paying attention to the senator's response may dismiss Pence's assertion that Biden will raise taxes.
Whereas Pence kept his signature formal demeanor and even tone, Harris used a minor slip up on the moderator's part to send a message to voters that she's an ordinary person, just like them. When Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today, called her "Kamala Harris" before quickly correcting herself to address her as "Senator Harris," the senator smiled and said, "That's okay, I'm Kamala." In other moments, she took a firmer tone, requesting that Pence not interrupt her and that she be granted appropriate time to respond.
At times, Pence interrupted Harris, potentially hurting him with some voters, but for others, his even keel could provide much needed balance to a Trump ticket for voters who prefer a more traditional politician.
In most elections, the vice presidential debate takes a back seat to the presidential debates but as has been the case with most things in 2020, this year is different. Between the interruptions and talking over each other, voters learned little from the first debate so they may have been looking to Pence and Harris to explain the America that awaits them if their ticket wins in November.
The issue of the new coronavirus was quite literally center stage at the debate—as both candidates sat behind plexiglass to prevent infection—and Harris came out strong calling it the "greatest failure of any presidential administration" in America's history. She pointed to the number of deaths and cases, as well as segments of journalist Bob Woodward's book that revealed that Trump had been told early on about how serious the outbreak was, potentially sowing doubt in voters' minds about how much trust they could put in the administration.
In making her points about the White House's strategy, she repeatedly brought it back to how it directly impacted individual Americans. She asked them to consider the difference it would have made to their own lives if they were privy to the same information the administration had and linked the "ineptitude" of the Trump administration's response with the financial hardship of individuals.
"This administration stood on information that if you had as a parent, if you had as a worker knowing you didn't have enough money saved up and now you're standing in a food line because of the ineptitude of an administration that was unwilling to speak the truth to the American people," Harris said.
Pence, who heads the White House's Coronavirus Task Force, pushed back against Harris' criticism of their strategy. Shifting focus back to the administration's key talking points, he highlighted the suspension of travel from China, backing it up with praise from Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). He also fought against Harris' criticism that the Trump administration failed to keep people properly informed by using comments from Fauci, who is widely respected for being a truth teller, that Trump regurgitated what was said in the Oval Office during press briefings.
Pence knocked Biden's plan, which Harris said would create a national strategy for contact tracing and testing and a vaccine that's free for everyone, as being an "awful lot" like what Trump had been doing. Opening up the possibility he created a narrative that had someone else been in office, the result would be the same.
Harris didn't address specific differences in the strategies, instead saying it was "clear" that what the administration has done "hasn't worked," a missed opportunity to highlight "what could have been" with Biden as president.
Pence twisted her words around to be a reflection that what Americans did "hasn't worked," adding that it's a "great disservice to the sacrifices the American people have made."
On the issue of health care, Harris homed in on the Trump administration's danger to people with pre-existing conditions, and despite a shake of the head or a comment here or there, Pence offered no concrete plan for how the administration would reform health care while protecting those with pre-existing conditions.
But, Pence stayed firmly on message and the repeated comments could plant the belief that when it comes to the economy, the president is the better choice.
Both candidates dodged and even flat-out avoided questions they didn't want to answer, but one thing is certain: voters likely learned vastly more than they did in the debate with Biden and Trump.
In short: Harris performed about as well as she needed to, and Pence, a bit better. But given the lack of fireworks or stunning moments, it's unlikely that this debate changed anybody's mind. That makes it a win for Biden, since polls increasingly show him pulling away.-
1
-
-
Danas je na rasporedu debata izmedju kandidata za podpredsednika (Pence vs. Harris).
Za zainteresovane, koji su budni, moze se uzivo na netu pratiti ovde:
Wednesday, October 7
9-10:30 PM EDT on ABC · CBS · FOX · NBC · PBS
Stream: C-SPAN · CBSN · ABC · NBC · PBS
Apps: ABC News · CBS News · CNN · Fox News · NBC News
Moderator: Susan Page
Location: University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Format: Nine segments of approximately 10 minutes each
edit: slovca
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, boxcube said:
Bush koji ima totalno drugaciju politiku i opstu filozofiju nego Tramp i koji je slicniji Obami i Klintonu ima veze sa Trampom kako tacno? Osim formalno preko pripadnosti stranci. Tramp je postavio i Boltona pa nikom nista i razne tako ljude koje je smatrao dobrim tada za nesto i koji nisu nicim obavezani da se slazu sa njima a kao sto vidimo ni da govore istinu.
Znaci ti ne mislis da mi na osnovu visegodisnjih otvorenih akcija Antifa ekipe mozemo da analizairamo da li su oni zlo i kakvo tacno nego to zavisi od misljenja ovog ili onog ili pak neke antiustavne dinorasurs institucije????
Prvi pasus.
Trump nema ni politiku ni filozofiju (pa zato ne mogu da budu drugacije) nego samo sopstveni ego i interes - tim redom, jer ce cak sjebati interes da zadovolji ego.
Postavio je ljude (koje ne branim, cak se u vecini principa ne slazem s njima) pa ih najurio jer mu nisu dovoljno ljubili dupe, nego pokazali da misle svojom glavom.
O istini mogu da sudim samo prema onome sto vidim. Ko je kome i sta rekao, imamo samo njihove price. Ipak vise verujem "njima" (npr. Boltonu - za koga inace mislim da je sumanuti ekstremni desnicar) nego Trumpu koji uporno govori da je ocigledno belo - crno.
Evo, na svakoj KZS uporno kaze da USA ima fenomenalno dobre rezultate u suzbijanju epidemije - a svi, ukljucujucujuci i zvanicne vladine izvore, daju drugacije podatke.
Dakle, znam da je Donald Trump lazov - a da li laze i Mary Trump, neka oni rese izmedju sebe ili na sudu.
Drugi pasus.
Da, mislim da nemas pojma. Ti bi da "analiziras" na osnovu podataka sakupljenih ko zna odakle i iz kakvih izvora, po sopstvenom ceifu.
Ne znam sta su, citiram iz tvog posta, "antiustavne dinorasurs institucije"? Pretpostavljam da je typo, pa si mislio "dinosaurus?" Pa, DHS je nastao nakon 9/11, a FBI je, istina, stariji. Ako su obe agencije "antiustavne," bilo bi dobro da javis Trumpu, da ih ukine.
Ne znam odakle se javljas i koji su ti izvori informacija - ako mozes pojasni.
Ja zivim u USA skoro 40 godina. Ziveo sam u 4 savezne drzave, sve konzervativne: Alaska, Kansas, Texas i Alabama. Posetio sam 44 drzave.
Poslednje 2 godine sam u Alabami, u gradu sa crnackom vecinom. Ovde nisam video BLM, nisam imao nikakvih problema sa Crncima. Ali ima pick-up trucks (kamioneta) sa zastavama konfederacije i nosacima pusaka (kako se prevodi "gun racks"?).
Prosle godine sam kupio kucu na brezuljku, u mirnoj slepoj ulici, lepo mesto. Doslo nekoliko komsija, sve pristojni i dobronamerni ljudi, neki i doneli kolace i svi mi zazelili dobrodoslicu. Pazi, ja sam imigrant i poreklom Balkanac, a jedna komsinica mi rekla: "Bas mi je drago da si ti kupio tu kucu, plasila sam se da se ne dosele neki Crnci."
Ajd' mi sad objasni kako i zasto ja nista ne vidim i na koje oko sam corav.
-
2
-
-
Sta da se radi kad se oglasi i DHS (Department of Homeland Security), institucija koja je osnovana u vreme Busha (republikanca) i na cijem celu su ljudi koje je postavio Trump?
DHS: White Supremacists ‘The Most Persistent and Lethal Threat’ Within the U.S.
The assessment follows widespread outrage that President Donald Trump has not done enough to condemn white supremacists.
Ili treba da verujem Bohumilu i Angeliji koji kazu da su najvece zlo Antifa?
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, Harmonika said:
To be fair, ustajali su i ljudi sa tri bajpasa sa respiratora kod nas, tako da..e sad, da li je Tramp samo od onih koji su imali srece i prebegli, ili je, kao sto i i ti i ja impliciramo, prosto imao sve uslove lecenja, isto mozemo da nagadjamo..
2 minutes ago, urosg3 said:Ma da ali ne za par dana. Bukvalno tri i po dana, pa majkumu. Nešto tu debelo ne štima.
Ne bih donosio opste zakljucke o virusu na osnovu Trumpovog slucaja.
Sve KSZ tokom njegovog predsednikovanja, bilo da je pricao on ili neki portparol, su bile prepune insinuacija, dezinformacija i lazi - od toga se moze sastaviti podeblja enciklopedija...
Moguce je da nije bio tako bolestan kao sto su rekli, mozda nije ni zdrav kao sto kazu, mozda - ko zna. A mozda jeste bas kako izjavljuju.
U svakom slucaju, ono sto je on prosao (prolazi?) nije primenjivo na obicnog/tipicnog gradjanina koga virus dokaci.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Crni Bombarder said:
Garros za sirotinju
Uf... Ovo izgleda kao neka metalna greda, ne d'o ti bog da se zatrcis u to...
-
5 hours ago, urosg3 said:
Prvo što moraš da naučiš kad se oženiš je da rečenicu: "Da draga!" izgovaraš sa razumevanjem i tečno.
Kod mene je gazda (muskarac, ja) glavni u kuci.
Odlucujem o svemu.
Zena mi samo kaze kakvu odluku da donesem...
-
2
-
1
-
-
Recap debate (
)
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, bohumilo said:
.........
p.s. Kako to da su u tekstu pomenuli samo jednu zrtvu, gde su svi ostali ljudi koji su ubijeni (ima ih preko 30 do sada) u ovim poslednjim nasrtajima pecinara na civilizaciju, kako to da oni nisu ubrojani u zrtve levicarskog ekstremizma?
Prvo, molim te da civilizujes retoriku. Nismo tinejdzeri u kafani. Mani se "pecinara" da se forum ne vrati u prepucavanje o "komunjarama" i "fasistima..
Drugo, ocigledno nisi procitao linkovani clanak ni shvatio od kada je Wrayev izvestaj, tj. svedocenje pred Kongresom.
Kao sto verovatno neces ni procitati ovaj:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/right-wing-militias-civil-war/616473/
Uostalom, evo sta kaze republikanac, Senate Majority Leader:
McConnell: 'It was unacceptable not to condemn white supremacists'
link za clanak: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/518988-mcconnell-it-was-unacceptable-not-to-condemn-white-supremacists
Izgleda da su za tebe i Barry Goldwater i svi levije od njega "pecinarski lefticari."
edit: da dodam citat iz clanka
Trump called on one prominent white supremacist group, the Proud Boys, to “stand back and stand by” and then quickly added: “Somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”-
1
-
-
Moja dva omiljena autora su Peter Egan i Kevin Cameron. Svaki test ili reportaza koju napise Egan izgledaju kao vrhunska proza, nesto sto bi pisao nobelovac Gabriel Garcia Marquez da se bavio motociklima.
Cameron je pak vrhunski analiticar i inzenjer koji ume da pojednostavi i predstavi masi citalaca tehnicke detalje. A poceo je kao mehanicar i tuner, "nabrijavajuci" dvotaktne motocikle pocetkom '70-ih.
Evo njegove odlicne analize, sta se desilo u poslednjoj treci:
Fabio Quartararo Wins GP Monster Energy Of Catalunya
Cool track temps in Spain shakes up the MotoGP championship again.
Surprise rather than routine has been the rule this season. At freshly repaved Misano, last week and the week before, grip had been very high—ideal for Ducati—yet Maverick Viñales had won in masterful style on Yamaha. At Barcelona there was no grip and race day temperature was unseasonably cool. Franco Morbidelli had set pole, and after a first lap chain reaction crash, Johann Zarco and Andrea Dovizioso were out—and Dovi’s championship point lead destroyed. It was Fabio Quartararo, winner of the first two races at Jerez (and discouragingly little since), who took the race lead from fast-starting Morbidelli on lap 9. Tremendous emotion was generated as Valentino Rossi, too, came past Morbidelli to be second—and in striking distance of the lead and a 200th podium in his lifetime total of 350 MotoGP starts.
All the riders agreed that grip was very low and that the workhorse medium rear tire would be difficult to get to working temperature and keep there. At the same time, everyone also recognized through practice that tire drop would be a major issue. Low grip sometimes has this effect—by making wheelspin and rubber fatigue so hard to avoid. Not only that, the ideal strategy of getting away first and then breaking clear was made risky by the tires seemingly “remembering all insults.”
Jack Miller put it this way: “A problem with the Michelins is that if you push too hard in the first four or five laps and overheat them, you make their durability much worse, especially on the rear. And in Barcelona it’s easy to do that because there are fast accelerations when the bike is bending.”
“The grip level is very low. So you have to ride the bike in a different way compared to Misano, and manage the sliding and spinning rear as much as possible—which is difficult,” Rossi said.
Francesco Bagnaia said, “I have little confidence… With 10 precent throttle the bike is already sliding. It seems at this moment that the tires are not warming up.”
Former 500 rider Randy Mamola described Barcelona as “much faster and flowing” as compared with Misano. Its numerous straights look as though they would offer advantage to the fast-accelerating Ducatis, but the low grip nixed that. Qualifying was a front row lockout for Yamahas, being 1-2-3: Morbi, Quartararo, Rossi. This, with knowledge of Yamaha’s low position on the engine performance scale (Viñales was most direct on this point), shows that it was the Yamahas' ability to remain stable while turning that was their advantage. Yamaha team manager Lin Jarvis was forthright: “Has this problem (early season engine failures) affected our performance? Yes. This problem comes from a batch of valves.”
How can valve condition be affected by unusually high temperature, as appeared to happen at Jerez? The valves are either titanium or the intermetallic titanium aluminide, and must have their sealing surfaces and stems coated with a wear-resistant material. Should anything damage the sealing surface of an exhaust valve (such as a poorly adhering coating), leakage could result, with a steep and possibly damaging rise in valve head temperature. Too many disagreeable possibilities!
Viñales, having to deal with whatever programmed limits on the engine the above has made necessary, said, “Like always, in fourth, fifth gear we have no power so I lost a lot of places on the start. Not in the initial part, but in the second part of the start (once the field came to speed).”
Michelin, in the person of Piero Taramasso, rejected the theory that the tires brought to Barcelona for this 24-lap September event were too hard to warm up properly because they were chosen for a race normally held in warmer weather.
"The truth is that on the rear we went one step softer for the soft, medium, and hard, so the allocation is softer for this time of the year.
“We did the right thing to make it one step softer…and the lap times show this; we were faster in FP1 and FP2 than last year.”
This leaves us with the cooler “long sleeves” weather itself—air temperature 63 degrees Fahrenheit, track temperature 68 on race day—as the major factor in the medium rear’s slow warm-up, putting the top 10 finishers on soft/soft.
If at any time you find yourself losing interest in a sea of techy talk about tire choice, track condition, and rider style, take heart. Although we may want the riders to be heroes who win by just being that good, they actually rise or fall with how well they perceive and respond to these variables. Why, for example, did Rossi lose the front at turn 2 on lap 16? This is a right-hand course, making the left sides of the tires the cool sides. Turn 2 is a left. In his words:
“I was pushing because I wanted to stay close to Fabio (Quartararo) but today the temperature was very low and turn 2 is always dangerous because on the left you have less temperature on the front tire.”
Our heroes process all these things constantly. MotoGP is a high-speed intelligence test, not a lottery for compulsive gamblers.
Who is more disappointed? Rossi, for missing a clear chance to win at age 41? Or Dovizioso, for fate’s having wiped his name off the top of championship points?
Dovi continues to try to change his long-established riding style to work with the higher grip of the new, softer-carcass Michelin rears. In the past, he used the ability of Ducati power to slide the rear Michelin to begin turning as the bike rolled into the turn. Because the new tire has too much grip for this to work, he must find another way. Bagnaia’s successful way has been to brake hard, but not down to the lower apex speed of Dovi’s point-and-shoot style. Instead, Bagnaia enters the turn faster, on a bigger and more circular line, requiring less acceleration to recover speed on exit. In effect, Dovi must retrain himself as completely as a bicyclist facing the task of learning to ride a bike whose steering works backward. All his carefully honed reflexes from his years at Ducati are now working against him. They must be unlearned and replaced.
The winner, Quartararo, suffered sudden tire degradation just as the two Suzukis closed in, saying, "I dropped from (one-minute-41) to 42, and then to 43 in the last three laps.
“Two more laps and I would have been doing the lap time of the Moto3 guys. Lap 25 I think these guys (Joan Mir and Álex Rins, on Suzuki) would have overtaken me.”
At lap 16 the two Suzuki men had found themselves able to lap quickly enough to challenge the leader’s advantage. It seems the Suzukis go out of balance when new tires are put on, compromising the early laps for riders Mir and Rins.
Mir said, “Our bike suffers when we put on new tires. Normally with tires that aren’t worn the bike’s problems are masked. In our case it’s the opposite.”
Rins and Mir qualified 8th and 13th, respectively—a real handicap which these riders have learned to offset in later laps when their half-used tires bring their bikes to their best lap times. This is what enabled them to catch up to and challenge Quartararo in the last third of the race, breaking into the “Yamaha zone” and demoting Morbidelli to fourth.
Why would a bike suffer a loss of performance on new tires? One obvious way would be that when the grippy rear tire is new, it overpowers or simply lifts the front, limiting full use of acceleration. Years ago, in 2002, Yamaha had a similar condition—the use of a qualifying tire gave the team no advantage. The Yamaha men acted as if this were a great mystery, but to the Michelin techs this was a ho-hum matter—the bike clearly needed some weight shifted to the front. This leads me to suspect that disagreement and conflict between the trackside crew, facing the raw data, and the manufacturer’s certainty of what ought to work may be more general than we think. In the past there have been many cases of factories that tried to win races by “remote control.”
Be that as it may, when the Suzuki men become able to deploy the full ability of their well-balanced bike in qualifying and in the opening laps of races, they are going to achieve great things—and the others know it.
It’s tempting to decide at this point that Yamaha and Quartararo have it knocked. Not likely! Tracks to come won’t favor them as Barcelona has, and the horsepower of the Ducatis and KTMs will again become usable. There were the Ducatis of Miller and Bagnaia in fifth and sixth, awaiting their opportunities.
Onward to twisty Le Mans, as the weather grows steadily colder. There are surprises aplenty yet to come.-
1
-
-
Ne znamo dokle ce koronavirus biti sa nama (tj. protiv nas), ali ima nade:
Wimbledon 2021 is set to go ahead (with or without an audience)
link za citav clanak: https://www.tatler.com/article/wimbledon-2021-plans-to-go-ahead
-
21 minutes ago, bohumilo said:
Ocigledno najvise crnokosuljasa ima Dzo Bajden, koji im, kada ih organi redi izdvoje od civilizovanog sveta, iz svog dzepa placa kauciju da mogu vec sutra opet da nataknu carapu na glavu, da se se zamotulje u crne kosulje i da uz urlike "Smrt Americi" napadaju americke gradjane i imigrante.
Zanimljivo. Samo ne znam, kako to FBI ne razume? Najverovatnije, jadni, ne citaju forum...
.....
This reticence to condemn the violence perpetrated by those on the far-right contrasts markedly with the president’s vociferous attacks on left-wing radicals, which he repeated during the debate: “Somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left. Because this is not a right-wing problem — this is a left-wing problem.” His conclusion contradicts the congressional testimony of FBI Director Christopher Wray, who insisted that White supremacists and anti-government groups currently pose the most serious domestic security threat.
Wray described Antifa (short for “Anti-Fascists”) as an ideological movement rather than an organized group while acknowledging that violence perpetrated by its followers was a cause for concern. On August 29, an Antifa activist allegedly shot and killed a man attending a pro-Trump rally in Portland, although reports indicate that the victim was himself armed. Even if this incident proves to be an unprovoked murder, it pales in comparison to the 64 Americans killed by White supremacists between 2015 and 2019.(
bold moj)Citat je iz clanka pod naslovom "Presidential debate raises the specter of election violence"
link za citav clanak: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/519004-presidential-debate-raises-the-specter-of-election-violence
-
1
-
-
Za one koji su se pitali sta i zasto oko Trumpovog poreza, zanimljiv clanak koji to relativno jednostavno objasnjava.
Mada je objavljen na CNN-u, uopste nije anti-trumpovski ili politicki obojen, samo se pavi poreznim zakonima i propisima.
Why you pay taxes, and rich Americans -- like Donald Trump -- don't always have to
citav clanak ovde: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/success/taxes-trump-wealthy/index.html
-
1
-
-
Konacnu rec neka ima Chris Wallace, moderator debate. I, BTW, on radi za (barem nekad) predsedniku dragi Fox News.
Chris Wallace Calls Debate ‘a Terrible Missed Opportunity’
The veteran anchor conceded he was initially “reluctant” to step in during the Trump-Biden matchup. “I’ve never been through anything like this,” he said.
“I’m just sad with the way last night turned out.”
Chris Wallace, the “Fox News Sunday” anchor and moderator of Tuesday’s melee of a debate between President Trump and Joseph R. Biden Jr., was on the phone Wednesday from his home in Annapolis, Md., reflecting on — his words — “a terrible missed opportunity.”
“I never dreamt that it would go off the tracks the way it did,” he said.
In his first interview since the chaotic and often incoherent spectacle — in which a pugilistic Mr. Trump relentlessly interrupted opponent and moderator alike — Mr. Wallace conceded that he had been slow to recognize that the president was not going to cease flouting the debate’s rules.
“I’ve read some of the reviews. I know people think, well, gee, I didn’t jump in soon enough,” Mr. Wallace said, his voice betraying some hoarseness from the previous night’s proceedings. “I guess I didn’t realize — and there was no way you could, hindsight being 20/20 — that this was going to be the president’s strategy, not just for the beginning of the debate but the entire debate.”
Recalling his thoughts as he sat onstage in the Cleveland hall, with tens of millions of Americans watching live, Mr. Wallace said: “I’m a pro. I’ve never been through anything like this.”
Mr. Trump’s bullying behavior had no obvious precedent in presidential debates, even the one that Mr. Wallace previously moderated, to acclaim, in 2016. In the interview, the anchor said that when Mr. Trump initially engaged directly with Mr. Biden, “I thought this was great — this is a debate!”
But as the president gave no sign of backing off, Mr. Wallace said, he grew more alarmed. “If I didn’t try to seize control of the debate — which I don’t know that I ever really did — then it was going to just go completely off the tracks,” he said.
Asked what he was feeling when he called the debate to a temporary halt — instructing the candidates that “the country would be better served if we allowed both people to speak with fewer interruptions” — Mr. Wallace said, “The answer to that question is easy: Desperation.”
Asked directly if Mr. Trump had derailed the debate, Mr. Wallace replied, “Well, he certainly didn’t help.”
Care to elaborate? “No,” Mr. Wallace said. “To quote the president, ‘It is what it is.’”
In the spotlight, Mr. Wallace was keenly aware of the complexity of his task: ensuring an evenhanded debate, avoiding taking sides, allowing candidates to express themselves while keeping the discussion substantive.
“You’re reluctant — as somebody who has said from the very beginning that I wanted to be as invisible as possible, and to enable them to talk — to rise to the point at which you begin to interject more and more,” Mr. Wallace said. “First to say, ‘Please don’t interrupt,’ then ‘Please obey the rules,’ and third, ‘This isn’t serving the country well.’ Those are all tough steps at real time, at that moment, on that stage.”
The Commission on Presidential Debates said on Wednesday that it would examine changes to the format of this year’s remaining encounters between Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump, a clear sign of its frustration with the results of Tuesday evening. The commission also took pains to praise Mr. Wallace for his “professionalism and skill.”
The suggestion that moderators be given the power to mute the candidates’ microphones — popular on social media in the hours after the event — did not sit well with Mr. Wallace.
“As a practical matter, even if the president’s microphone had been shut, he still could have continued to interrupt, and it might well have been picked up on Biden’s microphone, and it still would have disrupted the proceedings in the hall,” he said.
And he noted that cutting off the audio feed of a presidential candidate is a more consequential act than some pundits give it credit for. “People have to remember, and too many people forget, both of these candidates have the support of tens of millions of Americans,” he said.
Steve Scully of C-SPAN is set to moderate the next debate, in a town-hall format where Florida voters will ask many of the questions. Kristen Welker of NBC News is the moderator for the final debate. Mr. Wallace’s advice: “If either man goes down this road, I hope you’ll be quicker to realize what’s going on than I was. I didn’t have that advance warning.”
Mr. Wallace flew home from Cleveland on Tuesday night. At an airport there, he accepted a glass of champagne from Lachlan Murdoch, whose family controls the Fox Corporation, and Suzanne Scott, the chief executive of Fox News, both of whom had been on hand for the debate. (“I didn’t feel much like celebrating,” Mr. Wallace admitted.)
Back in Annapolis, “I’ve been involved in a certain amount of soul-searching.”
“Generally speaking, I did as well as I could, so I don’t have any second thoughts there,” Mr. Wallace said, in conclusion. “I’m just disappointed with the results. For me, but much more importantly, I’m disappointed for the country, because it could have been a much more useful evening than it turned out to be.” -
20 hours ago, Angelia said:
.......
ja sebe smatram za pametnog i uspesnog menadzera, ali sam tokom karijere uspela da zaposlim i otpustim dosta nesposobnjakovica. Deo posla.
Angela Merkel je profesionalni politicar, koji uz to ima dosta podrske. Potpuno razlicite situacije.
Ja sam rekla u vreme kad je on govorio da je virus nista, da on laze - zato sto mu je neko rekao da tako treba i da je tako bolje.
politicari lazu, big news.
1. Da, ali ti radis za svoju firmu. On radi za sve drzavljane i treba da bude sposobniji.
Opet: zasto prethodni predsednici nisu zaposlili i otpustili toliko nesposobnjakovica?
2. I Trump je sada profesionalni politicar. Oboje za to imaju samo OJT (on-the-job-training).
Ali Merkel je naucnik (ima doktorat iz hemije) i razume podatke, a Trump je lovac u mutnom sa nekretninama i (tudjim) parama.
Zato Merkel zna sta ne zna i pusta vrhunske znalce da rade svoj posao, za razliku od sarlatana Trumpa koji bi davao injekcije deterdzenta da leci bolest...
20 hours ago, Angelia said:A ti si Bushu verovao kad je rekao WMD u Iraku?
Verovao si Hilari kad je rekla da nije koristila privatni server. I da nije znala za Benghazi?
Verovao si Klintonu kad je rekao "I did not have sexual relations with that women"?
Jesi verovao i Obami da ce Obamacare da nas kosta nista, ali ce da obezbedi zdravstvo za sve koji ga nemaju? Sta se desilo nakon toga?
Kako ti to verovanje ide danas?
1. Nisam verovao Bushu, stavise, sudelovao sam u demonstracijama protiv tog rata.
2. Nisam verovao Hillary, ne verujem joj ni danas.
3. Nisam verovao Billu Clintonu, ali me ta laz nije smetala. Promiskuitet je za one kojima se dopada, ne ide mi iz dzepa. To je privatna stvar njega i njegove zene - kao sto je i Trumpov seksualni zivot njegova. Sve je OK dok nema nasilja, a neciji sporazumni odnosi me ne zanimaju.
4. Obamacare me nije kostao nista, kao penzionera, imam dobro (privatno) osiguranje i ne uzbudjujem se. Nisam ni preterano pratio. Od sledece godine cu imati i Medicare, pa me to vec zanima.
5. Verovanje mi lose ide, jer Trump laze o stvarima koje me se ticu.
Proveo sam prvi deo marta u Los Agelesu i izlozio se riziku (kao i moja cerka i njen decko). Kad nam je razlog za boravak propao (sve zatvoreno), to je bilo zbog intervencije na nivou Californije - a Trump je jos uvek laprdao da opasnosti nema i *ebes maske. I LAGAO, kao sto je nedavno priznao, jer su mu o opasnosti profesionalci govorili jos u januaru.
Trumpu njegova sopstvena obavestajna sluzba javi sta Rusi rade u Avganistanu, a on kaze da je to bzvz jer zna, nazvao je postovanog kolegu Putina i ovaj ga je ubedio da je sve to "fake news."
Neverovatno, zar treba da ti ja ovde nabrajam sve njegove lazi i gluposti?
-
5
-
-
Andjo, nije mi jasno zasto toliko branis/opravdavas Trumpa.
Uleces u zamku koja se u filozofiji ili pravu zove prima facie - nasim recnikom, "na prvi pogled."
Drugacije receno, ako je on izjavio - valjda je istina.
Pri tome ne "zagrebes ispod povrsine" nego samo pises o nekom detaljcicu.
Evo, za gomilu ljudi koji su ili dali ostavku ili bili najureni iz administracije, pa i za sopstvene bivse saradnike (advokate ili neke u firmama) Trump nema lepe reci nego ih zove budalama, lazovima i pokvarenjacima ove ili one sorte.
Pretpostavimo, za potrebe diskusije, da je u pravu, da oni stvarno jesu takvi.
Ali, jbmliga, kako je moguce da on tako pametan i uspesan menadzer izabere, zaposli i postavi na funkcije toliko nespobnjakovica?
Skandale gomila tolikom brzinom da ih je nemoguce ispratiti i upamtiti. Vac nakon par dana, svi su vec zaboravili Woodwardovu knjigu i snimke intervjua.
Kad je sam Trump priznao da je lagao o opasnosti coronavirusa, ti si prihvatila njegovo objasnjenje da nije hteo da dize paniku.
OK, sasvim moguce.
A ja pitam dve stvari:
1. kako je Angela Merkel dobila gomilu pohvala za hendlovanje krize kao drzavnik, mada u Nemackoj nije bilo panike?
2. ako je Trumpova izjava tacna, kako da mu verujem? Hebes virus, nego ako on kaze da nema opasnosti od talibanskog terorizma... - je li to istina ili "samo nece da dize paniku" mada su mu CIA ljudi mozda javili da talibani nameravaju da postave bombu ispod sledeceg nebodera?
Covek je lazov (i sto drugih stvari) i necu se prijatno osecati ako dobije izbore.
-
1
-
-
On 9/17/2020 at 2:32 PM, zoran59 said:
Mislim da cu na kraju ipak kupiti neki od onih elektricnih bicikala sa "power assist" za te namene.
Osecam se kao Mujo iz onog vica kad kad je opisivao kako radi sa puluautomatskim strojem: "ja budak samo dignem, a on pada sam!"
Opet se nadovezujem na sopstveni post.
Kupio.
"Chatovao" sa firmom, pitao za rok isporuke, kazalo 5 do 10 radnih dana, ali zbog corone i zastoja moze da bude i 15.
Ma, nije.
Kupio u sredu, a stiglo danas - 4 dana!
Imao sam drugog posla pa sam samo stigao da pogledam, sutra cu ga sastaviti.
'vako:
Ako je neko stvarno radoznao, kupio sam ovde: https://www.curated.com/products/3250049/ancheer-26-2-woking-models-foldable-electric-bike-with-super-lightweight-magnesium-alloy-6-spokes-integrated-wheel
Postavicu fotke kad ga sastavim.
Sunshine State, ako opet putujes kroz Atlantu, javi pa da popijemo kaficu. U Alabami sam, na samoj granici sa Georgijom, do Atlanta Int'l Airport imam manje od sat voznje...
edit: lazem, a mozda i ne. Upravo pogledah na Google Maps, pise:
1 h 5 min (76.3 miles)
via I-85 N
Fastest route, the usual traffic
Your destination is in a different time zone.
A i ne lazem jer Google pominje "usual traffic" - a ja ne vozim bas "usual" nego malo brze...
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Ritam Abazović Dritan said:
Zoran59 te na ovi topic demantuje. On je Amerikanac, a svaki dan je na evropski (srpski) forum.
Pogesno.
Imam puno identiteta, a Amerikanac sam po porezu i penziji. Ali to nije jedino, pa ni primarno sto me identifikuje. Na forumu nisam zato sto je srpski, nacionalnost me ne interesuje osim kad se nadje na putu i smeta.
Ovde sam zato sto imam interese slicne onima mnogih forumasa. Na Balkanu imam dosta familije i interesa, a i provodim deo vremena. Zato me zanima ima li autoputa izmedju, recimo, Vinkovaca i Sarajeva ili moram kozjom stazom. I jesu li okrpljene rupe na ulici ispred mog stana u Zagrebu i stana mog netjaka u Beogradu. Stanje puteva izmedju dva sela u nekoj Tanzaniji me ne interesuje, a ni putevi u Iowi gde sam bio i vise nemam nameru da idem.
Javnim prevozom u nekim balkanskim gradovima cu jos putovati, a u USA samo sopstvenim (osim ako bas daleko moram avionom).
Zanima me i politika i ekonomija, na nacin da vidim hoce li moji netjaci imati posao (i koliko placen) kao normalni ljudi ili moraju da se uclane u neki partiju, a onda u slucaju druge varijante - koliko je to moralno i posteno.
Dakle, ja sam platisa poreza, otac, stric i techa, penzioner i vlasnik nekretnine. Iz svih tih stvari proizlazi gomila problema koje trebam resavati i o kojima diskutujem.
Ako me ti vidis samo kao Amerikanca ili Balkanca ove/one nacionalnosti, to je samo tvoj nacionalno-optereceni problem.
-
5
-
-
1. Quartararo
2. Vinales
3. Rossi
-
On 9/23/2020 at 4:23 AM, Belgrade said:
....................
Evo samo primer kako bih ja preformulisao neke od tvojih recenica iz prethodnog posta:
.....................
Lepo je to, Beograde, ali nerealno kad ovde pisemo kratke postove a ne traktate ili knjige. Tako, pojednostavimo.
A sada su pokazati/dokazati sa smo, vecinom, previse osetljivi kad neko uopsteno pomene grupu a mi se barem donekle osecamo delom iste.
I to vredi za politiku, ratove i, ne d'o bog da se pomene, ratne zlocine.
Nasa draga forumska koleginica Vilhelmina zivi u Svedskoj a sada je na letovanju u Hrvatskoj. Danas (str. 744, vrh) je na temi o coronavirusu je opisivala "mere" i zastitu od zaraze, kakve su razlike u pristupu toj problematici u raznim drzavama, kako joj je OK na letovanju. Da skratim, necu kvotovati citav post.
No, evo citata:
"A ako izuzmem prepun avion, osecam se bezbednije nego igde u Svedskoj. Definitivno, Hrvati nema sta nisu uradili da se gosti zastite ukoliko sami to zele. Ko je bas resio da se zarazi, tesko da ga neko u tome moze spreciti, bez obzira gde se nalazio."
(bold moj)
Niko nije reagovao...
A sta bi bilo da sam post "reportovao" i trazio da Vilhelmini udeli ban, od min. 15 dana pa sve do trajnog?
Jer:
- generalizacija! Nisu svi Hrvati u turizmu, ima ih koje zabole xx za turizam!
- ignorise i vredja nacionalne manjine!!! U njenom hotelu mozda radi i neki Srbin ili Bosanac, a nije ih pomenula!!!
Vidis li koliko je to suludo?
Jer da je napisala da su Hrvati 90-ih proterivali Srbe, pola foruma bi skocilo na nju.
Ovako, OK je da neko napise "Srbi su gostoljubiv narod" ali nije da kaze "Srbi su pocinili genocid u Srebrenici."
Onda dodjemo do situacije da neki debeljko na vrh brda koji u zivotu nije video vodu dublju od 15-ak cm kaze "MI smo prvaci u vaterpolu!" Ali u ratu, nismo "mi" nego, ma tamo neki pojedinci..."
Nemam respekt za takav selelektivni kolektivni identitet.
A ovde, ni moderacija nije imuna na to pa ponekad prolaze postovi koji ne bi trebali, a pristojni forumasi dobiju ban.
-
1
-
Kafana "Kod Tilkea"
in AutoMoto Sportovi
Posted
Eh, Alene, ja bih te najverovatnije gnjavio i zajebavao oko starih...
Recimo, Imatra - to je, ako me secanje ne vara, poslednji put da je F1 trka vozena preko zeleznicke pruge...
No, ako ti je stvarno dosadno i imas vremena, okacicu ti neke staze koje sam vozio - ako imas neki motociklisticki program. Voleo bih da vidim gde i zasto sam gresio, ali kako bi tamo prosla F1 mi ne znaci bog zna sta.