I think it could work now, but as a single camera show without a laugh track and with shorter seasons. Derry Girls would be a good inspiration.

Context is important.

Some games are close to unplayable at launch, at least for some people. Some games have multiple game breaking bugs at launch, at least for some people.

Those games will likely be fixed within days or a couple of week, but if somebody pays full price for a game at launch, obviously they are going to be upset if the game is broken.

Some games repeat what other games have done before while offering a worse experience.

If I bought the patched version of such a game at a discount, my overall experience might be positive: but understandably, somebody who paid full-price and had issues with the game is going to be very unhappy.

>Glover is a free man in a socially free society. He can date whoever he wants to.

It's such a strange argument anyway. If Glover had dated 1,000 women, all of whom are not black, then it's reasonably to say that Glover isn't attracted to black women (which is still different from: Glover doesn't like black women.)

But if Glover has only dated a few women and has dated the same woman for the last 8 years, then his dating choices tell us nothing other than that he likes his current partner (and mother of his children).

To be fair, she opted out of being a regular on Two and a Half Men.

She could have made a ton of money, but wanted to do projects she felt passionate about.

No, that is not 'their' opinion.

Four police officers were convicted in a court of law and six others were fired.

Dutch prosecutors no longer use odor tests by dogs as evidence because of this case.

Several convictions based on odor tests were overturned.

So I have to ask you again, why is this so hard for you to believe?

Do you watch a lot of procedural dramas?

No. Unfortunately I made nothing of that up.

Why do you think I made that up?

I genuinely am very interested to know why you think I would make something like that up, this is not a rhetorical question.

Here is a link and a a translation of part of the article:

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/politie-sjoemelde-met-geurproeven-verdacht-vaak-wees-de-hond-de-dader-aan~bb7b11f2/

"From an old research report, it now appears that the smell test has been manipulated for decades in order to get the suspect convicted. At the time, the Public Prosecution Service did not see this, or did not want to see it. Nevertheless, a scent dog had identified a suspect as the perpetrator several times, although it was later proven that he could not have committed the crime."

"The police officers who admitted in 2006 to the court in Leeuwarden that they never conducted a blind scent test consistently wrote in all official reports that they had done so."

"We already knew long before 1997 that police dog handler Kobus S. could guarantee a positive result," says former detective Jan Paalman. "Kobus could turn a weak case into a strong one."

>There was never much doubt that the perpetrator was black. It just wasn't Broadwater.

Well, there is the problem.

Broadwater only became a suspect because Alice Sebold falsely accused him.

The only reason the police was convinced Broadwater was the rapist, was that Sebold initially was sure he was the man who raped her.

She was raped by a black man, and accused another black man.

I just want to make it clear that she did not accuse Broadwater after the police had arrested him, or pointed him out to Sebold.

She accused a black man she had met on the street.

>the victim blaming overtones

She was not the victim in relationship to Anthony Broadwater.

She was not raped by Anthony Broadwater and she is the one who identified him as her rapist after she met him on the street.

When she met Anthony Broadwater, the police wasn't there to deceive her.

She was sure Anthony Broadwater raped her (without being prompted by the police), then, weeks later, could not identify him.

It was only then that the police convinced her that Anthony Broadwater was the rapist.

I'm not saying this to condemn Alice Sebold, she made a terrible mistake when she was a traumatized 18-year-old.

But it is important to get the facts right: Anthony Broadwater became a suspect because Alice Sebold falsely accused him.

The real problem is that there is no objective way to determine whether or not a dog has smelled a particular thing, has missed a smell, or has recognized a smell, outside of a controlled experiment.

This means that the problem cannot be fixed because there is no way to verify if the handler has done a good job outside of controlled experiments, which means that the handlers can just make stuff up.

In the Netherlands hundreds of dog tests have been falsified because the police wanted a result, not because the handlers made mistakes.

The investigating officers would tell the officers who handled the dogs which result they wanted.

Of course outside of law enforcement, this is far less of an issue.

This is actually part of the problem. And you are being optimistic with 'in a week'.

Games are clearly released before they are ready.

The people who play games in the first 4 to 6 weeks get a sub-optimal experience.

The obvious solution is to wait two months before buying a new game, which its what I do, but I miss the communal experience of a whole bunch of people discovering a new game at the same time.

Plus the more logical solution is releasing games when they are ready.

While you are at it, can you please end the war in Ukraine and world hunger?

Also what do you think of I'm Thinking of Ending Things and Howard's End? And what about Avengers: Endgame?

I love Meg Tilly.

The movie is not great, but the dreamy aspect to Tilly's performance works really well.

It explains her actions, and it explains Jake Berman's motivation.

The movie doesn't work if Kitty is an ordinary woman.

I also think she's the best thing in Psycho II.

The problem with both movies is that lightning doesn't strike twice. You can't will a classic sequel to a classic movie into existence.

It's the same with 2010: The Year We Make Contact, Jaws 2, Rocky II.

Most great sequels to a classics movie are either a natural continuation of the story or an ambitious re-imagining.

There is a difference between a family business, and people getting hired for jobs in a business that is not owned by their family because of personal relationships.

Also, not caring about a thing, because there are other things that are worse isn't a sign of great intelligence.

And if you do want to us that argument: nepotism is part of a bigger problem, people gaining power and influence because of social background rather than knowledge and skill.

That would be less of a problem is society made it easier for people who don't have a support network to get ahead in life.

Ugh, because of you I watched some Greg Gutfeld and he is painfully unfunny.

And I don't find Stephen Colbert et cetera all that funny...

It's background noise for old people.

If the movie is a flop, but gets decent reviews, the industry will blame Chris Pine, not Regé-Jean Page.

Because Regé-Jean Page isn't an established movie actor.

If the movie is a succes, he'll get a bunch of job offers out of that.

He was never going to play a big part in the second season of Bridgerton.

The trailers for the movie have been well-received.

This is some weird logic.

> I know that Amazon acquired MGM recently (except James bond?) for billions of dollars.

They charge you more to make that money back.

I don't like defending large companies, but streaming services are bargains because you can cancel them by the month.

You can pay $12 and watch everything you really like on MGM+ and cancel after two months. I actually watched MGM+ for free for a month.

That is great value.

As for Prime itself, you can cancel that as well and subscribe again when they have added more shows/movies you want to watch.

> It doesn’t affect my reaction to the joke that has just happened

It does affect your reaction to a joke. You just don't realize it.

It's an important reason why people have the ability to laugh. It's signal to other people to find something funny.

(Of course, if you have a personality disorder, you might be immune.)

You might not like shows with a laugh track, but that is a different matter.

The important thing to understand that is that multi-camera shows with a live audience (that is told to laugh) or a completely fake laugh track is made differently.

The script and the performances actually have pauses build in for the laugh track.

Actors time there performance because they know the laugh will be there or will be edited in.

And arguably multi-camera shows need laugh tracks because without it they come across as awkward.

In case you are wondering, the multi-camera approach is fast and cheap, which is why it's often used for sitcoms.

Here's the thing: nobody cares about your opinion.

Posting your negative view on a widely praised show 14 years after the end of the show and making a few random remarks about how you feel about the show is worse than pointless.

You are just taking up space.

If you wanted to have a meaningful conversation, you could have just asked people what they like about the show.

I don't think HBO shows are for you.

Most HBO shows have a a heavy feel to them and feature morally grey main characters.

Try to watch a few first episodes.

Its seems to me that this post is made by a Russian bot promoting r/conspiracy.

I don't think it's a coincidence that ex1stence happens to link to r/conspiracy on the day that r/conspiracy suggests that Ukrainian soldiers are Nazis.

I have no prove that ex1stence is a Russian bot, but it just feels that way.

I can definitely think of a reason.

Direct access to all Netflix subscribers.

That database is extremely valuable.

The number of subscriptions isn't very high (for companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Google), but these are paying households, 220 million of them.

And people in those households interact with Netflix daily, or at least a few times a week.

Business users are also consumers. Plus Microsoft has a long history of targeting students. Get them when they are young.

I would offer a bundle with Netflix and an MS product and use that MS product to try to convince customers to upgrade to an MS Office subscription or an Xbox pass.

I can see a low-res, one screen only subscription, very cheap, with MS adds for emerging markets being very effective.

Have you done any research? Don't be tricked by people. Do your own research.

All legal experts agree that the protection of free speech in the Constitution cannot be absolute, because that would allow people to give false testimony in court.

Many legal experts believe that this part of the constitution must be incomplete, based on the wording of the relevant sentence.

There have been many legal cases where free speech stood at the core of the argument, and there is plenty of jurisprudence that makes it clear that freedom of speech is not absolute.

In general, the right to free speech means that citizens can publish their opinion without interference of the government, but not that citizens can bully, threaten, and/or deceive, other citizens with impunity.

Example: if you don't like Joe Biden, you can say that you don't like Joe Biden and you can specify why you don't like Joe Biden. You can say that he is a liar, a bad president, that he is too old, or that he is confused.

It's not illegal to say negative things about the president. Within reason...

If you say specific negative things about him that are factually not true, that is slander (libel when written). You might get sued in civil court.

If you threaten his life because you don't like him, the FBI will come knocking. because that's something for a criminal court.

Would you care to explain why you think this?

>He had been expected to waive his right to an extradition hearing on Monday morning, but in court demanded to see a copy of his federal indictment
>
>“I did not request him to be here this morning,” the attorney said. Franklyn Williams KC, the Bahamian prosecutor, said that he “understood that [Bankman-Fried] intended to waive extradition,

That would be chaos. Chaos: a state of utter confusion and/or disorder.

It is very unusual that it is unclear why somebody is in court and even more unusual that it is unclear who requested a court hearing.