New/Improved Longest Thread

[Dtrain323i]

[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]


Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.

[rumsfald]

American Apparel makes nice quality, feeling, non-branded, made-in-America T-Shirts and other cotton clothing, should you care to support a creepy CEO who serially tries to sex borderline legal chicks.

[Versus]

anime apparel

[Didzo]

Mix, match, and explore around. I don't like strong branding either, but I don't find it tough to avoid even at the mall.

Here are my opinions regarding T-shirts. Department stores often have a very nice high quality selection of T-shirts, but also for a premium price. And yes, it is possible to find unique products even in big deparment stores. All you need to have is some luck and patience. Nordstrom is the department store I am most familiar with, and while the base prices on products are high, they have sales throughout the year where you can find a nice graphic (or plain) T-shirt at around $25. The Public Opinion T's are always 2 for $30 and are high quality, comfortable, and come in a wide range of colors. They are slimmer fitting than most other brands, so that may or may not work to your advantage. If you have a Nordstrom Rack near where you live, that's probably the best place to find deals on a regular basis on a wide range of clothing.

Even though you said you don't like branding, don't shy away from designer or name brand stores even if they don't seem like a place you would ever shop at, especially if you go to an outlet store or a sale. The discount racks are where the good stuff hides. Most name brand stores (even the strongly "lifestyle oriented" ones) have plenty of clothing that doesn't give you any real hint of what brand they are (aside from tags inside the shirt or design cues that no one who doesn't track brands will ever pick up). If you have a good eye, patience, and luck, you can find clothing articles that look and feel far better than anything AE sells without any stitched logos for prices at or a little bit higher than AE's prices.

For online shirt shopping, this is my pick. No branding, great quality T-shirts, excellent prices, and unique looks. I would buy more from there if I already didn't have too many random T-shirts to wear (and many of the designs are too bold for my taste). If you prefer a more "vintage" (read: hipster) twist, these guys have a large selection of graphic tees.

[A. Crow]

[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=2632.msg251863#msg251863 date=1344862120]
Does anyone know any brand of clothing that makes high quality T-shirts and other casual clothes without any sort of branding or other craziness. This is going to sound really hipster but ever since I read pattern recognition I've sort of adopted the idea that I don't really want to run around sporting some companies brand to make me feel cool. I just want some really nice clothes with either plain colors or color blocking that feel good to be in. I have some American Eagle plain color shirts that I love because they are of course plain but also because the colors are really nice. I also have another AE shirt that has a decent thickness without being too heavy and is super comfortable to wear, but it's a little crazy on the graphics. I was hoping to buy some clothes that had both characteristics.

http://shirt.woot.com/ They used to be made out of AE plain color shirts, actually.
[/quote]

WHAT?!?!?!?! AE plain color shirts??!?!?!?  god damn.  mind = blown.  I guess I have to go to AE to get new T-shirts now. 

[Surf314]

[quote author=HeK link=topic=2632.msg251899#msg251899 date=1344885677]
[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]


Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.
[/quote]

I feel like Singer was the subject of some big antitrust action against it. I am forever ruined.

[Didzo]

[at0m]

[quote author=Dtrain323i link=topic=2632.msg251911#msg251911 date=1344893507]
[quote author=HeK link=topic=2632.msg251899#msg251899 date=1344885677]
[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.
[/quote]I feel like Singer was the subject of some big antitrust action against it. I am forever ruined.
[/quote]I see no mention of antitrust anything on their wikipedia article, so I'm a little confused. Also, WWII made a LOT of US (and UK, and German) companies retooled for wartime manufacturing, it wasn't a rarity.

[Surf314]

[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=2632.msg251945#msg251945 date=1344913234]
[quote author=Dtrain323i link=topic=2632.msg251911#msg251911 date=1344893507]
[quote author=HeK link=topic=2632.msg251899#msg251899 date=1344885677]
[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.
[/quote]I feel like Singer was the subject of some big antitrust action against it. I am forever ruined.
[/quote]I see no mention of antitrust anything on their wikipedia article, so I'm a little confused. Also, WWII made a LOT of US (and UK, and German) companies retooled for wartime manufacturing, it wasn't a rarity.
[/quote]

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/.../case.html

I think I cited this in my paper or something.

tl;dr - Singer conspired with the Swiss and Italians to use a patent to screw the Japanese who were undercutting all three.

[at0m]

[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251949#msg251949 date=1344918422]
[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=2632.msg251945#msg251945 date=1344913234]
[quote author=Dtrain323i link=topic=2632.msg251911#msg251911 date=1344893507]
[quote author=HeK link=topic=2632.msg251899#msg251899 date=1344885677]
[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.
[/quote]I feel like Singer was the subject of some big antitrust action against it. I am forever ruined.
[/quote]I see no mention of antitrust anything on their wikipedia article, so I'm a little confused. Also, WWII made a LOT of US (and UK, and German) companies retooled for wartime manufacturing, it wasn't a rarity.
[/quote]

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/.../case.html

I think I cited this in my paper or something.

tl;dr - Singer conspired with the Swiss and Italians to use a patent to screw the Japanese who were undercutting all three.
[/quote]Also, that court decision says it was dismissed on appeal, though :| and from reading it, it looks like the Italian company would've been justified to bring suit against the Japanese company directly, in the US (since it was a US patent), so I don't really see where there was a problem...

[edit] ah, reading further, it was dismissed on appeal to district court, then the dismissal was reversed by the supreme court. interesting.[/edit]

[Dtrain323i]

[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=2632.msg251945#msg251945 date=1344913234]
[quote author=Dtrain323i link=topic=2632.msg251911#msg251911 date=1344893507]
[quote author=HeK link=topic=2632.msg251899#msg251899 date=1344885677]
[quote author=at0m link=topic=2632.msg251897#msg251897 date=1344885407]
And a decent singer is like $100, will last forever.

Not anymore. Any plastic machine you buy will break within a year of general use.
What you want is a steel machine, be it Singer, Brother, etc, from a yard sale.
Find something with a universal motor mount and belt drive, it will make it as flexible as possible.
[/quote]Fun Fact: Singer Sewing Machine was one of the companies contracted to build 1911A1 pistols during WWII. They were only given a contract for 500 guns as an experiment to see how quickly a company could completely retool from peacetime production to wartime production without having any experience in wartime equipment manufacturing. A Singer branded 1911 can fetch up to $80,000 at auction.
[/quote]I feel like Singer was the subject of some big antitrust action against it. I am forever ruined.
[/quote]I see no mention of antitrust anything on their wikipedia article, so I'm a little confused. Also, WWII made a LOT of US (and UK, and German) companies retooled for wartime manufacturing, it wasn't a rarity.
[/quote]

very true, however each contracted factory only made a certain number and of varying quality. The Singer branded 1911s are low in number and of high quality, thus the $80,000 price tag. A far more common Remington Rand branded 1911 goes for about $1300-$2000.



Also Lt. Crow, you need to come to Nebraska next year to go do this with me.


http://www.zombiesintheheartland.com/

[A. Crow]

Yes.  But I'd need to drop $2k+ on gear first... I don't think I can check out a weapon from the arms room for that.

[Dr. Zaius]

http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

[Kor]

http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.

[Azure_Angel]

[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.

[Evil Cheese]

[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]

I sincerely hope the US government isn't that flimsy. If a president was able to bestow dictatorial powers upon himself, I would think someone else would have already tried it by now. That being said, the fact that the EO exists is certainly a concern and bad form on Obama's part. That wasn't the change we wanted.

[Dtrain323i]

[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]

The american people have options if it comes to that. 

[Hobospartan]

[quote author=Azure_Angel link=topic=2632.msg252189#msg252189 date=1345169565]
[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]

dtrain has firearms if it comes to that. 
[/quote]

[Azure_Angel]

[quote author=Azure_Angel link=topic=2632.msg252189#msg252189 date=1345169565]
[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]

I sincerely hope the US government isn't that flimsy. If a president was able to bestow dictatorial powers upon himself, I would think someone else would have already tried it by now. That being said, the fact that the EO exists is certainly a concern and bad form on Obama's part. That wasn't the change we wanted.
[/quote]

With enough power already given up by the people, anything is possible.

[quote author=Azure_Angel link=topic=2632.msg252189#msg252189 date=1345169565]
[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]

It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]

The american people have options if it comes to that.  
[/quote]

Isn't there something in the constitution that says, "The government is for the people by the people and if the people don't like the government they can rise up and create a new government"?

[at0m]

[quote author=Dtrain323i link=topic=2632.msg252193#msg252193 date=1345172567]
[quote author=Azure_Angel link=topic=2632.msg252189#msg252189 date=1345169565]
[quote author=Kor link=topic=2632.msg252187#msg252187 date=1345168310]
[quote author=Dr. Zaius link=topic=2632.msg252180#msg252180 date=1345162070]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/...770458.htm

executive order by prez handing over control of internet (and other communications) to dept of homeland security

america tries to fuck the free world again?

discuss

Honestly, it's terrifying. Humanity has already proven its irresponsibility with information control. There isn't a man or woman alive that can be entrusted with something as important as the internet. US isn't off the hook for nukes yet.
[/quote]It almost sounds like Obama is afraid he's going to lose this election, so he's working ever closer to giving himself dictatorial powers. That way when election time comes he can say, "Nope.avi" and suspend it.
[/quote]The american people have options if it comes to that.  
[/quote]Isn't there something in the constitution that says, "The government is for the people by the people and if the people don't like the government they can rise up and create a new government"?
[/quote]Gettysburg address had the 'by the people, for the people' line. And the second part of your statement is what the second amendment was inferring, re: our right to bear arms.