Pasquale said: "In the act I have a great big pair of moose antlers and they’re huge things - they’ve got like these huge prongs sticking out, and the gag is I have to put them on my head and I go ‘I put too much mousse on my hair’.
"But at the end of the act the curtains came down and all my props are strewn all over the stage and they bring the lights down obviously.
“As I’m starting to put all my props away and I literally trip over my moose head,” he said.
…
“Seriously, I [thought] I was going to die,” he added.
If that’s the kind of joke he’s bringing, it surely wouldn’t have been the first time he’s died on stage.
He’s carting these huge fucking antlers around on a national tour just for the lamest of lame puns. He must have workshopped this “gag” and miraculously not died on his arse, for him to decide it’s worth hauling the antlers around. Baffling.
Some crazy records being broken this year. There is also statistically outlying Antarctica ice melt but I haven't seen that story anywhere since first seeing it.
One thing you can do is write to your MP or representative.
Here is a letter template to write to your MP if you are in the uk - you could also use the template in the US or elsewhere in the world : https://www.theclimatecoalition.org/write-to-your-mp
Same old. Just follow specific users by copying their full ID (e.g. @Teppic@kbin.social without the space) onto the search on Mastodon and follow as normal.
We should perhaps use hashtags more here because that would would be another way for Mastodon users to find/follow kbin content.
Going the other way to contribute to a kbin magazine from Mastodon, If you want the post to appear in a particular magazine, simply mention it in the post content, for example, "@fediverse@kbin.social" (no space) Note it will appear in the Microblog section.
4+ years seems fair to me? You gotta keep in mind “attending a riot that couldve overthrown democracy” is not a specific crime. Like, it just isn’t. We’ve never had to charge people in this situation before.
Thus, he wasn’t charged with Jan 6 as a concept. He beat the shit out of a cop. I’d want a BLM rioter who beat the shit out of a cop to not do life, so why should this guy? I’ve hit cops - should I be imprisoned for life?
Frankly, I disagree that hitting a cop is especially more of a problem than hitting any other person. Laws like that are we we have cops doing the shit they do.
Also, no one should be in prison for any nonviolent drug offense full stop. Totally agreed there.
It does seem like we need a complete shutdown to deal with this. This current situation seems like an immediate emergency and not something we will deal with later down the track.
I think all we can try and do is what we can in out sphere of control and influence. Advice and tips are welcome!
It's true, I don't think you'd find consensus or cooperation with the idea, but we do seem to be at an impasse that we shouldn't (but probably will) just ignore.
I'm almost 70. First learned about climate change in 1972. Back then I was certain we would prevent at least the worst of the results, because we were passing good laws around pollution and environmental issues. But no, big time capitalism decided that short term (a few decades) profit was more important to them than leaving behind a habitable planet for their great grandchildren. I presume they thought that, being ultra rich, they would be able to either escape to another planet or build viable domes to live in.
Please don't tell my son, but I sometimes wish I'd chosen abortion. Now he has 3 children, and I cry for their future.
Im just young enough to experience the 70's a bit. Feels to me like everything passed that starting with reagan was just a big slide. I am so happy im not just a touch older or that I had gotten my career going faster because if I had I might have had kids. I have siblings with kids and grandkids though and I to weep for their future.
Back then I was certain we would prevent at least the worst of the results
Well, to be the bearer of good news, this is probably going to happen. The Paris Agreement aims to limit warming to below 2 degrees Celsius, and while there's still quite a lot of work to do and it's not going to be easy, this is a reachable target. There will still be significant consequences, plenty of people will suffer, and it's not remotely just or fair, but it also is not a cataclysmic and apocalyptic scenario.
It's really important to maintain some perspective with these things. A lot of very hard work has been done to get us to this point, and we shouldn't completely lose sight of that, even if we deserve quite a lot more and shouldn't even be in this situation in the first place.
If Netflix’s reporting on the matter is to be believed, then it’s an ironic outcome considering the wave of strongly-opinionated comments predicting the death of Netflix following the crackdown on password sharing. I guess convenience and habits really trump principles and posturing.
Just because they don’t share the same opinion as you doesn’t mean they’re stupid. Netflix is great for just sitting down and watching something random and discovering new shows and movies - especially foreign ones. It’s also priceless for kids shows for parents.
Stupidity is in the eye of the beholder. You can judge me as stupid in return for thinking that of these new subscribers if you want and then we‘ll both go our ways. Only one of us will pay Netflix no matter how much they enshittify their service or how much they raise their prices (since it‘s "priceless") and one won‘t. C‘est la vie.
I‘m already disappointed in people, this is barely making a dent, all that happened is the comment made me of think of a funny quote and then this other guy had to regale me with this "Netflix is priceless" crap, and now I get you heroes here advocating for the sorry ass corporation too. What a mistake of me to even be on social media at all, if it‘s just supposed to be a popular sentiment marketing circlejerk!
As I said, as a parent having a ready stream of endless Childrens content available at any time on any device in any place is priceless, and definitely worth the $20 a month or whatever it is you pay for it.
It was always going to lead to more subscribers because more people would lose access to Netflix so would subscribe themselves than would cancel their account because others couldn’t use their login.
The people that lost Netflix weren’t subscribers, and lots of them would have them subscribed. The subscribers had no reason to unsubscribe.
I was the subscriber and I unsubscribed because I alone wasn’t using it enough to justify the price. When I knew my sister and her family were watching too, it felt more like it was worth it.
I told my family I was going to cancel when they cracked down on our households sharing and they haven’t yet. My parents are still enjoying it at their house, and me at mine.
Yeah, I have been wondering just how bad their content has gotten, or of I somehow got pigeonholed by their filtering algorithms. Somehow almost everything was rated two stars out of five and just plain bad, or in some random language that I don’t speak.
I’m really pissed off when the same movie keeps appearing in every section with different thumbnail. Yes I’ve been fooled by both the category and the different appearance but I don’t recall ever being tricked into watching something, only annoyed and frustrated
What I'm finding and what's really annoying, is that every streaming service out there has like 1 or 2 shows and a couple of movies I want to see. Someone will bring up a show, but oh sorry, it's on Crave. Or nope, that one's on Disney Plus. That other show? It's on Prime.
I recently canceled Netflix and moved to Crave, and I am certainly no happier. Thank God I barely care to watch TV as it is.
I hated the crackdown but resisting on “principles” is bizarre to me. I left Reddit and Twitter due to principles. Netflix wanting to get paid for their service and content is reasonable. Wanting a business to serve you up free entertainment with no catch?
Also before anyone tries to claim hypocrisy - The difference between that and Twitter/Reddit is myself and the community create the content and are forcefed ads.
I don’t pay for Netflix and think their content mostly sucks but thinking “I deserve this service for free” is a childish perspective. Go ahead and pirate it, I couldn’t care less, but don’t act like it gives you the moral high ground lol
With this whole “you pay for a screen package, love is sharing a password” business they just dug a PR hole for themselves. If they’d had offered price X per screen from the start, then introduced a “same household discount” or whatever, we wouldn’t have all this outrage. But execs can only see as far as next quarter and here we are.
I think I am more annoyed by their pricing plans following this move. They are double dipping by charging more for additional screens and then preventing users from using said additional screens. They shouldn't have tiered pricing plans by number of screens if they have no intention of honouring them.
They’re not preventing you from using more screens. If you want to watch Netflix while the kids watch Netflix in another room, that’s what the multiple device plans are for.
Unless I want to watch from my holiday home. Or if my kids want to watch Netflix at my ex's house. Or if I travel regularly. Or I want to regularly watch Netflix with my friend or girlfriend at their house. There are numerous reports of restrictions on all of these, so they clearly are limiting the number of screens I can use.
You get a one time use PW in all those other instances. I was actually thinking about creating a shared email address with only a Netflix account associated to it so my whole family could still use it without having to pester one another about the one time use code, but at that point piracy is just easier.
Netflix wanting to get paid for their service and content is reasonable.
Sure, it's reasonable, and why I started subscribing in the first place. But if I pay for four screens, I expect to be able to use all of those four screens, no matter what address they are being viewed from.
You’re not paying for that though. The terms of service have never allowed giving other people your details and letting people outside your household use your account.
Also you can still use 4 devices no matter where you are - mobile devices and tablets and laptops are not IP restricted.
About a month ago we could not use the account on a smart TV in the rental home because it was away from the home network. Updating the home network wasn't an option because the family members not on the trip were still watching things at home.
Being able to watch on a phone, but not on a TV, is stupid.
Company decides to change the deal and terms of service to require nudes and accompanying driver’s licenses photos every 21 days in this wild hypothetical
Whirlybird: Why do people think they’re entitled to use a private company’s service nude-free while still paying? It’s in the ToS!
You skipped the part where Netflix actually encouraged account sharing for a long time. Now they frame the account sharers as thieves. Also the other part where quality of content goes down while subscription prices go up while still not providing plans with hq streams for single people. Which all was tolerable for a few bucks a month. Without sharing netflix is simply not worth the money
Can you point to where they’re calling account sharers “thieves”? I’ve just seen them say they’re now limiting screens. And agreed the content sucks which is why I unsubscribed awhile ago. No one is forcing you to use it, but at the same time no one deserves it for free.
They’re not saying it directly of course, but they clearly frame the account sharers as “bad guys” now. I mean you’re correct that no one is entitled to watch netflix for free but that “poor netflix just wants to get paid” narrative is some serious BS. I also kinda doubt netflix tells us the 100% truth about subscription growth/recession. The only reason I did not switch my account on/off over the years was because it was shared and it would have required coordination with the other party.
The sexual assault of a Kuki mother and daughter duo, who were stripped naked and paraded while being groped and molested by a mob of men in Manipur, is the latest example of that.
The video footage showing the women weeping, wincing in pain and begging their attackers to show some mercy is disturbing to watch.
The fact that the first arrest has been made only after the outrage in the case that happened 78 days ago and was reported to the police more than two months back doesn’t inspire much confidence in the administration - more so since many of the men are clearly identifiable in the footage.
[…]
“The gang rape of the women happened after the village was burnt down and two men - one middle-aged and another a teenager - were beaten to death by the mob,” the ITLF said.
Police said that the incident took place on 4 May and that a case of abduction and gang rape and murder had been registered in Thoubal district.
Initial reporting also mentioned that the mob killed the father and brother of the younger woman (didnt state in it that the older woman was the mother).
This video is after the mob abducted them from police custody as they were trying to flee.
That’s what we in the cybersec business call an “oopsie daisy I made a little fucky-wucky”.
For real though, this isn’t a problem yet. The TL;DR is that Mali has a top-level domain “.ml”. Just like “.co.uk” for the UK. And the military uses the domain “.mil”. So lots of emails accidentally get sent to “[Military email]@[Military email server].ml” instead of sending to .mil.
So a bad actor could simply set up an e-mail server with .ml domains that mirror the military’s .mil ones, and start collecting all of those mis-addressed emails.
So why isn’t it an issue yet? Because we had a contract with Mali to manage their domain. They literally signed administrative rights for the .ml domain over. So the US was able to basically set up their own .ml mirrored sites, to capture all of those mis-addressed emails. They have captured thousands throughout the years, because military members keep misaddressing their emails. Supposedly containing all kinds of sensitive data. Everything from medical records to troop movements and equipment inspection reports.
But that contract ends this week, so Mali could 100% start registering their own domains when that contract expires and domain registrations begin expiring.
One solution to this would be to set the .mil mail servers to either correct or bounce all .ml addressed mail, no? It makes emailing legitimate .ml addresses more difficult, but requiring a second, dedicated gateway or mailserver for .ml would be at most inconvenient.
Hmm. Have to admit. From the beginning I questioned why the BBC seemed to be the target.
If the star broke the law. (And paying a 17yo for explicit pic def is). Then why the hell are the parents not calling the police.
If it’s not illegal then as scummy as it may be. It’s all consensual, adults make a choice.
As bad as I feel for younger people taken advantage of by older. The reason we have the 18 law. Is 18ys ha #ve a right to make their own choice. Good or bad ones.
No other employer would have the right or expectation to address a member of staff following the law. And the police would be involved if it’s a crime. So why an attack on the BBC rather than a call to the police.
And most don’t. Those that do. The actions tend to have to be related to the professional status of the person.
IE if he was the guys therapist teacher or even a manager etc.
Heck if the teenager worked for the BBC in some way. Or had been interviewed. Fine the BBC would be seen as having some responsibility.
But this is no different to testcos being asked to investigate a warehouse worker. Because he/she met an 18yo in a pub and partook of consensual, acts.
The simple answer is: because the right wing press will use any excuse to put the knife into the BBC. Quite how the Murdoch papers get away with such an obvious conflict of interest is a question that needs asking.
The only way or becomes a BBC matter is if it isn’t a crime but the shiftiness of the behaviour could bring the organisation into disrepute, especially after all the previous scandals and mishandling of situations, and they would want to think hard about letting the guy back on telly.
To be honest, this is the whole reason I’ve been telling people that the story isn’t nearly what is being reported. If I was attacked by someone that I knew worked at Tesco, I wouldn’t write to Tesco to demand they investigate, I’d go to the police. So why involve the BBC? Why involve The Sun? If the “dossier” that The Sun has is so definitive, why are they not handing it over to the police like the BBC has with their evidence? Then, as the story developed: why did the step father change the complaint to the BBC after more than a month? And are we supposed to believe that this change just happened to occur less than 24 hours before The Sun’s front page headlines?
The problem is that the allegations are playing second fiddle to a dangerous, damaging witch-hunt clearly being played out to cause maximum damage to a public service broadcaster for the benefit of not just any tabloid, but a nasty, vindictive tabloid backed by one of the most sinister and manipulative people in the world. Murdoch will never face anything like justice for the evil he’s caused, but I seriously hope that this whole shitshow massively blows up in his face.
I joined it with a fake account so I could check it out and immediately left once I realized there isn't a place to just see the people I chose to follow. I was being bombarded by so much shit that it was just an awful time.
bbc.co.uk
Hot