Riot recruited experienced execs from Disney, Paramount, HBO Max and most notably Netflix, which yielded a well-regarded 15-year marketing veteran, Shauna Spenley, who was named president of global entertainment at the end of 2020. She in turn brought other Netflix execs...
Ahh, now the "two seasons and killed" makes sense.
This "transformational technology," as he says, will "accelerate the velocity of development and unlock truly novel game experiences that will surprise, delight, and inspire players."
Oh look, buzzword salad. Apparently though, the Netflix execs bought it. Not that I thought that Neflix has any business trying to run a game studio in the first place. But, this sounds like the same sort of bullshit which has cause many companies to burn billions of dollars on "blockchain". I suspect this "AI driven" drivel is going to end up in the same landfill as ET and NFTs.
I don’t think that Republicans need to kill the filibuster further. It’s already dead for judicial nominations, which they have used to full effect.
I'm not sure I agree that this removes the incentive to kill the filibuster. A lot of what the GOP wants to do will require passing legislation. Sure, they can kill a lot of existing legislation via the courts and I also expect "budget reconciliation process" to re-enter the political lexicon in full force again. But, there is going to be stuff they want to do, which will be blocked in Congress, via the filibuster. And I think that will raise the specter of killing the filibuster in some wings of the GOP.
Also, the map is much more favorable to Democrats in the next two Senate election cycles.
Ya, and this is why I mentioned there being wings of the GOP who understood just how useful the filibuster is.
I'm not completely sold on that idea. While I'm sure there are wings of the GOP who will buy into the idea of never losing power again, I also suspect that there will be members of the Senate who are old enough to know from experience that things never quite go to plan. Yes, we could be in for an end to Democracy, that possible. But, if we're there, the filibuster doesn't mean a thing. If our institutions are strong enough to hold up for the next four years, then the filibuster will be as contentious as it always is, when the majority has only a slim hold on power.
Even worse, it appears that Republicans have also managed to win majorities in the Senate and House. While thin, those majorities are enough that we can expect some of the Republican priorities to start getting passed. My major question for the first six months of 2025 will be, does the filibuster survive? I know many folks on the left wanted to kill it, when Republican Senators were using it to obstruct anything more progressive than not kicking puppies. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, will the left suddenly fall back in love with the filibuster? I suspect so. I also suspect that the MAGA wing of the GOP is going to be keen to kill the filibuster the first time it gets in the way of their project. And I wonder where the less dickish members of the GOP will come down on the issue.
Nope, this is them searching for it.
What do having sexl in a canoe and American beer have in common? It's fucking close to water
Hey now. Those Clydesdales are doing their absolute best to piss out Bud.
The diver probably has some food on him, which the stingray is trying to get.
I visited Stingray City in Grand Cayman a lot of years back. Part of the tour package was that they gave you small squid to feed to the stingrays, and they would climb up you, out of the water for that snack. Also, there were a lot of stingrays in the area. We were instructed to shuffle our feet as we walked, to avoid stepping on one. The swimmer in the picture only needed to hang out for a bit before one or more stingrays would have come over, looking for any handouts.
That said, the experience of Stingray City was absolutely worth it. Between that, and snorkeling at the barrier reef, I have a lot of fond memories of my time at Grand Cayman.
Dang, if I knew a ball warmer was an effective birth control, we'd have given up condoms long before I got my vasectomy.
Personally, I don't find Evangelical support of Trump all that surprising.
When you get down to brass tacks, this is an election between two candidates. Almost no one is going to look at those two candidates and find a perfect fit. It's quite possible that people won't even find a good fit. But, they have three choices, either one of the candidates or not voting at all. The latter of those choices is pointless, if one has policy preferences that they want to achieve. That only leaves picking the closest fit among the two candidates.
In may corners of Lemmy, and in this community specifically, there has been a very strong push towards the sort of "vote Blue, no matter who" message, which has been around for several cycles. And this message is not wrong. Harris's position on the war in Gaza has a lot of detractors. But, the choice is not between Harris and someone with a better position. The race is between Harris and Trump, whose position on Gaza is likely worse for those detractors. If those detractors don't want things to get worse, they pretty much have to accept the situation as is, vote Harris and push for changes. And I suspect a lot of folks will support Harris, some enthusiastically, in spite of that policy difference. Because they will find other policy positions that they strongly support are also supported or championed by Harris. Better a flawed candidate that one which is diametrically opposed to the policy positions which one holds most dear.
The thing which seems to be forgotten by folks who wonder "how can Evangelicals support Trump?", is that this same problem cuts both ways. The people who hold GOP aligned policy preferences hold those beliefs just as strongly as Liberal/Progressive folks hold their own. That they would fall into a "vote Red, no matter who" mindset should not be surprising at all. And for Evangelicals, I'd argue that this mindset may be even stronger. These are folks who believe that, not only does this life hinge on their actions, they also truly believe that the here-after does as well. As much fun as we might make of people for believing in an invisible sky-wizard, they really, really believe all that stuff. And their entire self-identity will be built on the version of that belief system. And let me stress that it's specifically "their version of that belief system". The various versions of the Christian Bible have a lot of ambiguous and contradictory stuff in them. It's easy enough to dig out justifications for nearly any positions one wants to take. And Trump's messaging has been pretty well aligned with the mainstream Evangelical version of policy positions on all the major topics. Harris's positions, on the other hand, are in direct oppositions to those positions.
Why does that matter so much? One of the deeply important policy positions to Evangelicals, for several decades now, has been overturning Roe v. Wade. And for all the shit one might say about Trump, he actually got that done. Nixon, Regan, Bush, and Bush all failed in that one, paramount goal. Trump, did it. Stop and imagine for a moment, a politician whose personal life you find distasteful, yet they managed to accomplish the one single policy goal you hold above all others, would you go vote against them? Especially when their opposition is loudly campaigning to undo that major policy win for you? Oh, and that opposition is also campaigning against just about every other social policy position you hold. Anyone saying "yes" to that question is bullshitting themselves.
Now, is Trump going to get anything else done for the Evangelicals? Who knows. But, Harris certainly isn't and she's actively hostile to their worldview. And Trump already got "goal number one" done. It seems like a reasonable bet that someone who already won the top line fight might win a few of the other ones as well. And all that "fascism, threat to democracy stuff"? Ya, that's just liberals whining because they are losing. It's Godwin's Law in action. The lawsuits and criminal convictions, that's just liberals weaponizing the DoJ to stop Trump, since they can't stop him legitimately. And Trump's past as a horrible person? A personal turnaround story of a "lost soul coming to Jesus" is damned near a foundational myth of Evangelicalism.
No, Evangelicals supporting Trump is neither surprising, nor unexpected. And you can bet they will latch right onto the next GOP candidate to come along. And it's not all that hard to understand. If you have ever bought into any version of "vote Blue, no matter who", then you are intimately familiar with the same logic. From their perspective, the US is in the grips of an existential crisis which is being perpetrated by Democrats. The very foundations of their self are "under attack" as society moves further and further away from their central truths. And, from my own perspective, I don't see that there is really any way to convince those folks otherwise. Trump isn't the Devil in the desert tempting Jesus. To them, he's the flawed man who is going to save their version of the US the only way he can. He's a vigilante, bending or breaking the rules, because the rules are stacked against "the righteous". That's the mindset you are up against.
War rarely decides who's right, just who's left.
It's a dick move, but I can kinda understand why SpaceX would make it. There has been a push to "de-risk" supply chains, after the disruptions caused by Covid, Russia's invasion of Ukranie, and other world events. This type of de-risking was partly responsible for the CHIPS and Science Act. The US Government has a strategic incentive to have a stable and resilient supply chain for semiconductors.
For SpaceX, having critical components be only available from fabs in Taiwan is a risk to business. China has been more and more vocal about it's desire to annex Taiwan. With Trump taking office, one can imagine that the US commitment to protect Taiwan may not be quite as iron clad as it has been in the past. It's not hard to imagine a future where China launches an invasion of Taiwan and the US does little more than shrug. At that point, any business which is solely reliant on Taiwan for semiconductors is going to see major disruptions.
So ya, it's a complete dick move. But, I suspect SpaceX will be far from the last company looking to build a supply chain outside Taiwan.