CatBus

Mrebo said:

SilverWook said:

Mrebo said:

oojason said:

‘Former Trump aide approved ‘black ops’ to help Ukraine president’…

Paul Manafort authorised secret media operation that sought to discredit key opponent of then Ukrainian president

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/05/ex-trump-aide-paul-manafort-approved-black-ops-to-help-ukraine-president

I find it ridiculous to refer to a media campaign as “black ops.”

Psy-op then?

To the extent any political campaign is, sure. Getting stories run doesnt strike me as terrible.

Depending on how much is done to hide the sources and methods behind a psy-op, I’d say it could be classified as a black op. Black ops don’t all involve helicopters, IMO the term just marks an certain level of compartmentalized secrecy.

Dek Rollins said:

CatBus said:

As we enter our second decade of continuous zero-to-subzero net illegal immigration from Mexico, Trump is celebrating by sending the National Guard to the southern border.

Presumably while there, they can pick up some litter and rescue some cats from trees, as they contemplate their fate as a sentient but equally pointless wall.

Maybe they’re going to stop the massive caravan of people that are currently traveling through Mexico with the intention of entering the US.

Good point, just because existing border security stops the Spring caravan every year doesn’t mean we can’t stop it biglier this year. Or maybe maintaining net-zero illegal immigration for ten years has made our border security so sleepy that the National Guard can take over while they nap.

chyron8472 said:

There are dangerous people. Period. Whether or not a few of them exist in a group that crosses the border has little point. We already have lots of dangerous people in this country who were born in this country to people who were also born in this country. It’s paranoia to single out illegal immigrants as some sort of significant threat worthy of mobilizing armed forces. As though there isn’t something better the Guard could be doing.

This dismissal, while attractive, ignores more interesting crime-and-immigration-related data though. Percentage-wise, illegal immigrants (and immigrants in general) are less likely to commit crimes than their native-born counterparts. This makes sense because illegal immigrants go to great lengths to avoid contact with law enforcement (such as not reporting when they are victims of crime, which is why sanctuary city/state laws improve public safety). So, theoretically, more immigrants means less crime per capita. That’s overall crime rates, though – there might be per-crime exceptions. For example, I suspect hate crimes may go up in areas experiencing increased immigration rates, but again that says less about the immigrants than the native-born citizens.

As we enter our second decade of continuous zero-to-subzero net illegal immigration from Mexico, Trump is celebrating by sending the National Guard to the southern border.

Presumably while there, they can pick up some litter and rescue some cats from trees, as they contemplate their fate as a sentient but equally pointless wall.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

An Oppo would have been overkill for my 32” Samsung LED set and Sony shelf system stereo, but I probably wouldn’t have had to spend an hour trying to get the TLJ BD to play if I had one.

Well, the 203 is overkill for my current system as well, but maybe over the next 10-15 years, that story will change.

SilverWook said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

3. Twitching.

This is an internet thing right?

Not if I said it, it’s not. I just meant being nervous and unsettled.

Sad to see so few had heard of Oppo. They’ve pretty consistently sat at #1 or #2 on every single ratings/roundup of disc players for the past decade or so. But disc players are so commodity I guess nobody looks at reviews – disc goes in, video comes out, that’s your complete feature set, and you can get that plus streaming for about fifty bucks these days. And I imagine that’s a large part of why they’re shutting down.

They also were never sold in electronics stores AFAIK.

They were, but not major box/chain stores. You pretty much had to go to one of those boutique audiophile sort of places (“excuse me, sir, would you like to schedule a time for one of our demo rooms?”), probably because the SACD/DVD-Audio support was a big feature for that crowd. Frankly those places make my skin crawl more than a little bit, but I managed to brave it long enough to walk out with a 203 yesterday, and of course they tried to upsell me to a 205.

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

3. Twitching.

This is an internet thing right?

Not if I said it, it’s not. I just meant being nervous and unsettled.

[ric pic]

Just when I thought someone thought I was hip and with it for a second.

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

3. Twitching.

This is an internet thing right?

Not if I said it, it’s not. I just meant being nervous and unsettled.

Sad to see so few had heard of Oppo. They’ve pretty consistently sat at #1 or #2 on every single ratings/roundup of disc players for the past decade or so. But disc players are so commodity I guess nobody looks at reviews – disc goes in, video comes out, that’s your complete feature set, and you can get that plus streaming for about fifty bucks these days. And I imagine that’s a large part of why they’re shutting down.

Oppo Digital is closing down operations. How are you preparing for your Oppo-free digital future?

1. Buying the latest available hardware and praying that it lasts forever.
2. Shopping around for other vendors.
3. Twitching.
4. Lowering your standards.
5. Streaming.
6. What’s an Oppo?

At the moment, my plans involve a mix of #1 and #3.

That’s fine, so far I’m in no hurry. If there’s ever a time crunch, I’ll post here for people to send in whatever they’ve got, if they’ve got anything ready.

PM sent.

CatBus said:

Thanks Frink. Jerk.

zpekholtz said:

hoover40 said:

Could I get a link to the Enlgish subtitles for all three movies? This is incredible btw, thanks!

can I get the subtitles too? please?

PM sent.

PM sent.

moviefreakedmind said:

What does “not taking chances” have to do with pessimism?

I was taking that to mean that the assumption that things could always get worse makes you more risk-averse than the assumption that things could always get better (in the case of making a decision without many facts to support either position, gut feelings rank higher).

Mrebo said:

Trouble with pessimism is not taking chances or appreciating a good thing until after it’s gone.

However, the benefits of pessimism include not taking chances, and seeing rose-tinted nostalgia glasses for what they are.

Possessed said:

So really being a pessimist is the most win-win way to live life up the fullest.

Pretty much have to agree with this. A life with no disappointments and some happy surprises, what’s not to like?

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

TV’s Frink said:

FWIW I do not want my daughters to go to an all-female school, I think in general it’s not a good thing for well-rounded development. I just think there are exceptions.

This is probably true at the younger levels.

High school and college students are still developing.

except that most college student have developed to a point of adulthood(at least legally speaking).

The Brian isn’t done developing until age 25.

WIR

ray_afraid said:

Maybe I’m looking at this wrong, but if you don’t identify as a woman, why go to a “college for women”?
And if a person with a penis identifies as a woman, will they admit this person?

Hard to say. Women’s colleges are especially appealing if you’ve undergone some sort of trauma involving men, as many have, and I’m sure there are other reasons. Policies would vary from school to school. My guess is a lot of college-aged people are also still working on self-identity, and things may change between admission and graduation.

You’d think college professors would have been able to figure out on their own that it’s considered insulting to call men “women”, but I suppose the administrative guideline exists precisely because some of them couldn’t.

We don’t have a Japanese re-translation… however, I have had my first report from my intrepid translator, and here’s what we have:

For the “end credits” dialogue, it is not an out-of-characater cocktail party/cast party/luau like I thought it might be. Well, it probably is the cast having some fun, but here’s what’s going on (protecting those who’d rather just wait for the whole translation from spoilers):

They are all pretending to be theatre patrons, confused about what just happened to the film they were just watching. They’re doing things like suggesting maybe there was some sort of power failure, wondering if they should tell someone, and eventually the theatre owner comes in to clear them out.

At least that’s what we have now. No actual text so far at all, he just gave it a listen because I mentioned that part to him. And of course I’m typing what he said, so I may have already gotten some detail or two wrong just by playing telephone.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Mrebo said:

I like that 75,000 people just up and decided that heroin didn’t taste as good once it was legal 😉

Those are hipsters for you.

Although I like your answer better, Portugal’s laws didn’t just decriminalize and walk away. They decriminalized and were very aggressive with making treatment options available.

Mrebo said:

#1 is huge and compounded with the caveat in your asterisk could be even bigger. We can’t predict how behaviors and supplies would adapt. There would still be an illegal drug trade across the border. Untaxed and unregulated is cheaper. That some problems may be lessened isn’t terribly compelling.

Agreed on all counts, except it’s hard to say about the illegal border trade. Certainly there’s an illegal trade in untaxed/unregulated alcohol across the border right now, and if the cross border drug trade reaches those same levels, I’m not sure that’s very relevant.

I would challenge #4. I see no reason not to treat it like a public health concern now, when mere use could be used to compel rehab. That would be much smarter than sending someone to prison in many cases. Treating something as a public health concern doesn’t mean there is a great rate of voluntary treatment.

There are tons of drug users who never even get a side-eye from the police, let alone jail time. Since alcohol prohibition ended, we have lots of recovery programs for alcoholics that appeal to your boardroom executive and soccer mom. During Prohibition, people would stay away for fear of admitting being involved in something illegal. That said, I agree there’s no reason not to treat it like a public health concern now. It’s just that your boardroom executive and soccer mom will very likely opt out of anything that may compromise their standing.

chyron8472 said:

CatBus said:

#1 would require some data to support it, I’d think, and maybe it’s already there. Surely there’s some Portuguese drug study people could point to.

People in the United States are not going to rely on data

T,FTFY

I honestly don’t know if there’s data supporting this part or not. But I do know that if there is, we’ll invent a reason to ignore it and pretend that means there’s data supporting continued prohibition.

Mrebo said:

I don’t see value in legalizing such harmful substances.

The argument is basically that legalizing the drug:

1. Wouldn’t really increase usage (due to illegality not being a disincentive)
2. Would decrease secondary illegal activity (due to decreased costs, increased visibility, and regulation)
3. Would improve safety of the substance* (due to increased visibility and regulation)
4. Would improve the ability to treat the issue as a public health concern (due to increased visibility)

Of these, I think #2, #3, and #4 are pretty self-evident. #1 would require some data to support it, I’d think, and maybe it’s already there. Surely there’s some Portuguese drug study people could point to.

* Assuming the substance is in fact what people would choose in a legalized environment. There’s an economic concept called “substitution of inferior goods”. When what people really want (cocaine) becomes too expensive to reasonably obtain, and living without it is not a feasible option (addiction), they start using crap (meth). Presumably, in a legalized environment, many or most meth users would become coke users, once both are more-or-less equally cheap. Not that this is a great improvement, but it’s something to consider.

Possessed said:

Yeah right. There isn’t a soul alive that doesn’t already know the “benefits” of meth.

MykitchenissofuckingcleanrightnowbutI’mgonnascrubitalittlebitmorejusttomakesureohgodthisshitisgreat.