We use Xsplit to stream directly to Restream. Not sure about their studio becuz our setup is a bit crazy, so not sure that will work.
New show: NewsReal with Joe & Niall
- Thread starter Joe
- Start date
We use Xsplit to stream directly to Restream. Not sure about their studio becuz our setup is a bit crazy, so not sure that will work.
The issue with dropped frames seems to have been a bug in the Restream add-on for Xsplit. The add-on was updated (by the Xsplit folks) on Halloween, and a test show worked perfectly today.
So, stay tuned!
I hope the test show was a good one and that Joe and Niall used the opportunity to say all the things they are not really allowed to by the Youtube censors
msasa79
Jedi Master
Yeah, like Niall being extra verbose and saying "squirrel".I hope the test show was a good one and that Joe and Niall used the opportunity to say all the things they are not really allowed to by the Youtube censors
Edit: @Scottie, "See you next week" means today in 2h and something or next Sunday, November 10th?
Last edited:
Yeah, like Niall being extra verbose and saying "squirrel".
Well, actually now saying "squirrel" may be more controversial than before. Maybe it can get you banned.
"Mindless, Heartless": Elon Musk After Celebrity Squirrel Peanut's Euthanasia
Elon Musk has criticised the Joe Biden administration, labelling it a "mindless and heartless killing machine" following the euthanasia of Peanut, the internet-famous squirrel confiscated by New York state officials.
www.ndtv.com
The Mechanic
Dagobah Resident
Funny, this shows up for me as the first video on the yt home page:
Ha! Funny how smoothly the tech works when you just do a silly test show...
Anyway, here we go again... maybe it'll be third time lucky for no power outages, no sound interference, and no 'hidden software updates'...
Anyway, here we go again... maybe it'll be third time lucky for no power outages, no sound interference, and no 'hidden software updates'...
US Election 2024: Joyful Harris or Adolf Trump?
To the 3 amigos at News Real studio, thanks for the show.
Along the lines of incident response of the modern age, it usually is focused on an incident command structures, developed over the decades to overcome communication and response logistical problems among agencies/groups. It has its own mass of bureaucratic problems built in. However, agree that the first action is rescue, and then a planning phase and hopefully being able to deal with the public's immediate comfort - not always achievable (in North Carolina it seemed that there was some interference, and local bodies were interrupted).
Following the 2003 Firestorm event near Kelowna, this saw a full review to find out what when well and what went wrong (Valencia will likely do this too). Back then, and a lesson that mimicked what went wrong with the 9/11 response (save the initiating deep state aspects), was in complex communications - poor duplex radio systems, where one hand did not know what the other hand was doing. This is typical and a fear in any incident response.
Good discussion on SOTT.net's monthly videos of events, and the last decade uptick is well noted. And then there is a guy like Randell Carlson, who takes one through the history of a lot of floods that happened around the world at x, y and z periods that where simply horrific, with no 3d maliciousness back then that triggered.
Perhaps similar, in a mass geographical scale from that of the Valencia region, was the 2013 event where an atmospheric river type system came up from Denver Colorado and parked itself over the mountainous dived between Alberta and BC, and then let go. The rain brought down all the remaining snow and quickly channeled into depressions, creeks and river networks, that then ran for 100 kms. and took out Calgary (and other) low-lying areas. Mass destruction of infrastructure took place.
What was the message? It was that these events will happen, and have happened before, and one never knows when. Generally, they are difficult to accurately predict (so keep aware). The message for the modern age (because many from back in time knew these things) was to not develop in high risk areas, and to over build anything that interacts with basic and landscape level hydrology (culverts, sewer, diversions, bridges etc.). The Roman's probably did a better job then we do today.
my 2 cents.
Along the lines of incident response of the modern age, it usually is focused on an incident command structures, developed over the decades to overcome communication and response logistical problems among agencies/groups. It has its own mass of bureaucratic problems built in. However, agree that the first action is rescue, and then a planning phase and hopefully being able to deal with the public's immediate comfort - not always achievable (in North Carolina it seemed that there was some interference, and local bodies were interrupted).
Following the 2003 Firestorm event near Kelowna, this saw a full review to find out what when well and what went wrong (Valencia will likely do this too). Back then, and a lesson that mimicked what went wrong with the 9/11 response (save the initiating deep state aspects), was in complex communications - poor duplex radio systems, where one hand did not know what the other hand was doing. This is typical and a fear in any incident response.
Good discussion on SOTT.net's monthly videos of events, and the last decade uptick is well noted. And then there is a guy like Randell Carlson, who takes one through the history of a lot of floods that happened around the world at x, y and z periods that where simply horrific, with no 3d maliciousness back then that triggered.
Perhaps similar, in a mass geographical scale from that of the Valencia region, was the 2013 event where an atmospheric river type system came up from Denver Colorado and parked itself over the mountainous dived between Alberta and BC, and then let go. The rain brought down all the remaining snow and quickly channeled into depressions, creeks and river networks, that then ran for 100 kms. and took out Calgary (and other) low-lying areas. Mass destruction of infrastructure took place.
What was the message? It was that these events will happen, and have happened before, and one never knows when. Generally, they are difficult to accurately predict (so keep aware). The message for the modern age (because many from back in time knew these things) was to not develop in high risk areas, and to over build anything that interacts with basic and landscape level hydrology (culverts, sewer, diversions, bridges etc.). The Roman's probably did a better job then we do today.
my 2 cents.
Evan
The Living Force
I’m curious about Joe and Niall’s remarks about the “DEWS” and the Lahaina fire. It sounded like they were Poo-pooing the be weapons talk (maybe I misunderstood?), because the Cs said in the September 2023 session that it was beam weapons that were used. Can someone please clarify this for me? I’m positive about the Cs answer. So am I completely tripping? I did hear the part about appearing in different areas, but not as the cause.
Last edited:
No, I didn't get that at all, I think what Joe said was that you have to look at every situation independently, and because in one situation there was an answer, because of the specific details of that situation, it doesn't mean that the same answer applies to every situation where similar claims are made. Essentially to beware of seeing patterns, due to similarities, where there may be none.
I truly enjoyed the discussion today guys!
I agree. Always a good discussion but today was exceptional. C's did warn that the populations were woefully unprepared for Earth Changes. As far as bureaucracies are concerned, every society has them but they tend to become much more extreme after ponerizing influences have taken hold. Compounded by a degeneration in competency, that could go a ways in explaining a lot. There could also be some orders coming from on high for various reasons. Who knows, but I agree one should start with what's most likely to be the case without jumping first to conspiratorial theories.
And I think Joe was making the point that they walled off Lahaina because they had something to hide in that particular case. But each case needs to be considered according to it's particular circumstances.
I think you must have just misunderstood the point Joe was making in the moment. He actually says that in the Lahaina scenario, you can make the case, based on specific factors, that DEWS were used. But that when you compare that to what happened in Spain, nefarious interference by evil governments doesn't need to be brought in to explain what happened there.
The link below starts at the relevant position:
Something interesting to note in the Valencia floods; yesterday both the King and Queen, and later the PM arrived. The PM's car was attacked and the King and Queen had mud and other items thrown at them and a chant of "murderers!" rang out from the crowd.
It's gives an insight into how much the social contract between the people and 'authorities' still holds sway. It's possible that, prior to the floods, if you had asked many of those people who were chanting "murderers", about their opinion on the monarchy, they might have said they are outdated and corrupt and 'we don't need them'. Yet as soon as disaster strikes and they are suffering, what people really believe comes out: that the monarchy or other authority has a duty of protection over the people and are invested with 'powers' that can and should protect the people from excess suffering and harm, of whatever nature.
If the people experience excess suffering and harm, they immediately and instinctively know where to put the blame.
The same is true for atheists or people who dismiss religion. They can do so with impunity during good times, but as soon as disaster strikes, they're the first to appeal to god, or his representatives on earth. It's similar to a child that disses mommy when she tries to stop him or her doing something that might get them into trouble, but as soon a trouble arrives, it's immediately "MOMMY!!!"
It's gives an insight into how much the social contract between the people and 'authorities' still holds sway. It's possible that, prior to the floods, if you had asked many of those people who were chanting "murderers", about their opinion on the monarchy, they might have said they are outdated and corrupt and 'we don't need them'. Yet as soon as disaster strikes and they are suffering, what people really believe comes out: that the monarchy or other authority has a duty of protection over the people and are invested with 'powers' that can and should protect the people from excess suffering and harm, of whatever nature.
If the people experience excess suffering and harm, they immediately and instinctively know where to put the blame.
The same is true for atheists or people who dismiss religion. They can do so with impunity during good times, but as soon as disaster strikes, they're the first to appeal to god, or his representatives on earth. It's similar to a child that disses mommy when she tries to stop him or her doing something that might get them into trouble, but as soon a trouble arrives, it's immediately "MOMMY!!!"
Trending content
-
Thread 'Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?'
- wanderingthomas
Replies: 29K -
-
-
