Page #2
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#97
New Comment Rating: 0 Similar topics: 1.Cum isn't stored in the balls!!! 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
only registered users can see external links
, and bicycles, people can tolerate horse and wagon to.!
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Thank the Clown for this. I guess his State of the Union was good for a week. 🖕😢😈
And wonders why he can't find work?
only registered users can see external links
He is mentally OFF his rocker if you ask me. Disabling himself.
only registered users can see external links
Real creativity is very hard to replace with AI, but still they worry.
That should be a bad sign for everyone else too, but you just think this is OK,
because you think of Hollywood as some liberal bastion.
Most of the actors are liberal, because acting requires empathy. If you don't have empathy, it's very hard to put yourself in the shoes of someone else, which is literally what acting IS.
The products of Hollywood have indeed become more 'woke', but that's because they
are catering to their audience. They are providing to a GLOBAL market and they are understanding Demographic shifts. The US (and many global markets) are becoming
more racially and culturally diverse. Younger generations (Millennials, Gen Z) tend to be more socially liberal on issues like race, gender, and LGBTQ rights.
Studios often aim content at younger viewers because:
- They go to theaters more
- They drive streaming subscriptions
- They shape online discourse
If you don't like that, ask yourself when you went to see a movie last.
Why should they make an effort to please you, when you don't PAY THEM?
they have been making lots of sequels of prequels and prequels of sequels.
Maybe that's why they sell it to young people so much,
they are too young to have seen all the stuff it is based on.
They also have been making everything action-packed for China.
The first time that I noticed was for some new James Bond movie.
I thought it had lost it's magic, but later John Cleese, who played Q, explained it.
It's a big market that likes that sort of thing, so Hollywood provides.
And young people are now damaged by TikTok, so every 30 seconds
needs to have something new happening. I saw the newest Smurfs movie
play for my girlfriend's cousin sons. That's very tiring.
They are making hundreds of billions that way, so it works for them.
Actually, you might be right that those products could be easily made with AI.
If they could make that money making movies for you, they would.
That's capitalism! Are you still a fan?
James Bond,007, used to be some good movies, but that last fellow that played the part,just didn't fit it. I think sadly it is time for 007 to go in the history books, they have ruined it. last i heard there was talk of 007 being a woman, how the hell would that work? Bond always gets the girl and so forth, it just wouldn't be the same
Lately, that has been difficult. In 2025, we saw 20, so that's also not enough.
It's a bit like people who are paying for a gym membership, but never go.
Still, when we go, I usually feel that it was worth my time. It helps of course that I don't get triggered by all the things that might trigger you. I also don't need movies to fulfill my expectations, based on previous movies. If some director wants to try something new, than that's OK by me. I agree that James Bond is a certain type of spy, that they cannot transfer to a woman, but they can certainly make a spin-off where the digits 007 can be occupied by a woman. It is 'lore' correct that those digits can be occupied by any spy, male or female. I agree that it wouldn't be the same, but I don't need it to be for that kind of movie. They should just think of a good title, because "James Bond" doesn't fit anymore. It worked with "Ballerina", which is a "John Wick" movie, with a damn good female character.
When I watch TV, I want to be 100% engaged with it. Just like you, I don't like the TV being used like some moving picture frame. My mother in law sometimes ruins it for me. When we visit her, the TV is sometimes put on a program that I like. She will talk through it the WHOLE time. As long as it's not the programs that I care about the most, I can live with it. At least my girlfriend agrees to watch the important programs, without yapping through it. We only watch programs together that we both like. I don't force her to watch our satirical news shows 'Lubach' or 'Even tot hier' (Up to this point), and she doesn't force me to watch any dating shows. We can watch those separately, when the other does something else. We both have hobbies too.
you remember them? Some of them still are, but the media has made many
bad products in the past too. I think our expectations have been raised.
A good friend of us wants to see all the Marvel movies. He has no one but us,
or just me, to accompany him, so we, or just me, see all of them. I almost always have a good time, but many of those movies are like fastfood, you have forgotten that you consumed it a few hours later. Still, some are actually good and some scenes are actually great. Sometimes, one actor doing a hell of a job, can lift up
an otherwise pretty mediocre or even bad movie.
I think Thor Love and Thunder (2022) was the worst Thor movie, but I think Christian Bale did a great job of playing Gorr. The rest of the movie is just
deleted from my brain; not worth remembering.
However, our friend was actually angry about certain scenes. I remember him complaining about stupid screaming goats and Thor being a dumb-ass in the beginning. He has high expectations of these movies, so he cares deeply
when they suck or have scenes in it that suck.
That one had indeed a lot of drama in it. I still enjoyed it.
My mother did when she was young,
i guess kids need to go back to doing it because the chemicals are so "dangerous".
only registered users can see external links
you can't have your cotton full of weeds
without using pesticides. There is no reason to pick cotton by hand, just because
you don't use pesticides anymore.
only registered users can see external links
It's not like that requires an AI revolution.
instead of using them because it's easy.
That's an acceptable trade off, for not killing nature.
Strange how you do care, when it's solar panels, for which it isn't even true.
While organic farming is better for soil health, a total shift would likely result in a 90%+ reduction in available cotton fiber, creating a major supply-demand crisis for the textile industry.
It would still cause some shortages of cotton but it’s doable
ChatGPT cannot find any data that comes close to a 90%+ reduction.
"Most research suggests organic cotton yields tend to be somewhere around
10–50% lower, depending on region, farming practices, climate, and years
after conversion." That's ChatGPT searching all sources, even the ones
that might have some bias against organic cotton.
We don't need to reach the 'organic cotton' certification completely.
That is a requirement to stop using synthetic fertilizer too.
I'm only talking about banning toxic pest and weed control.
Synthetic fertilizer is no where near as harmful to the environment.
New technologies make it possible to extract very useful fibers from e.g. bamboo, on a large scale. Bamboo can yield ~5–7 times more fiber per square mile than cotton. It doesn't require any weed control, because bamboo outgrows everything, and the pest control can be done biologically, without any impact on yield. (I'm not talking about very rare cases of pests.) At the moment, creating those bamboo fibers is a damn polluting process, but that's just a matter of innovation.
Again, oops. Sorry. 🤣🤣
"They suffer only a 82–93% reduction of the conventional yield."
If you read that and do the math, that doesn't leave much cotton! 93% from a 100% leaves 7% of the cotton for use. NO wonder my fruit of the looms cost more now!
I didn't even see that until now.
I will turn off the lights and suffer my shame for an hour.
I'm OK again, but I will never forget this cleansing experience.
Anyway, saving nature really doesn't require huge sacrifices.
Continuing to pollute it will come back to hunt us eventually.
only registered users can see external links
If the FCC idiot had left it alone, it would have never gotten this much attention.
Now this video has 5.3 million views and rising.
only registered users can see external links
By the way, James Talarico has recruited 14,000 volunteers, has shattered grassroots fundraising records and has not taken any money from corporate PACs. IN TEXAS!!!
only registered users can see external links
Yep,i am struggling now to not wet my boots when I wiz!
We are in a future where robots have taken over ALL the jobs, even prostitution is replaced by robotic Waifu whores. There was a war between the wealthy, and now "The Table of Privileged" (10 immortal wealthy people) control EVERYTHING and EVERYONE ELSE.
People get a monthly allowance of $1000/month, and prices for food and rent and everything else are stable, and about similar with today. It is strictly forbidden to build
your own shelter or grow your own food.
For every dollar above the standard $1000/month, someone older than 50 dies;
one 50+ person, for every $1000.
"The Table" is adamant that the random death is quick and painless, but most people have seen someone kick and scream for an hour, before they burn up into a pile of ashes.
"The Table" is almost untouchable, because they have a huge mercenary army of "Loyalists", that brutally suppresses all protests and disappears people who criticize the system. The "Loyalists" get $10,000/month, but they voluntarily kill themselves on their 50th birthday. Of course they all prove their loyalty, by committing heinous acts for "The Table".
Some people manage to live their life, by buying a tent and a sleeping bag, and the food they need, to save up for a mini-home, costing $25,000. They are not allowed in the city, they live in the wasteland, until they buy that mini-home. Others live like there is no tomorrow, live in a $10,000/month luxury apartment and spend like crazy. Their argument: "I'm 25 years old. I have another 25 years without a care in the world. Don't expect me to cry for some old fart, who had a good life and gets a quick painless death!".
There have been attempts to beat this system. By word of mouth, a "Day Of Retribution" was set several times. The "Loyalists" found out every time, and it was a massacre every time. The people almost won a few years back. Another date has been set. It can work,
if everyone fights them, with whatever weapons they can lay their hands on.
However, the "Loyalists" gain ranks every single year.
What will you do?
In that kind of world, you will probably be executed for it, by the "Loyalists".
The suicide pact is only for the "Loyalists".
It's a damn shitty situation, but if everyone accepts to not go over the $1000/month limit, no one gets the horrible random death. But, how do you get everyone to agree?
"The Table" would not care if the people tried to start a movement to have people agree with limiting their spending to a $1000/month. That's not considered criticizing them.
They might not even care if some join forces to kill the big spenders.
However, what is the moral choice here? The big spenders didn't create this system,
they just prefer a 50 year long good life, over a long shitty one. Who is right?
There is also the inherent evil of the wealthy gaslighting people and the big spenders copying that, to help ease their conscience. Criticizing that is dangerous.
There will be enough to buy in the stores. Everyone gets $1000/month, robots can make everything, and the wealthy do want some sort of economy to keep the sheeple docile. Guns will obviously be banned, but kitchen utilities and sports accessories will be available. They got to keep the big spenders happy. People can buy a lot of knives and baseball bats and create an arsenal. The "Loyalists" are not everywhere, all the time, people can practice to become quite lethal with knife throwing. If everyone attacks them everywhere at the same time, it will be a bloodbath, but the people will win, in a day.
I didn't say that they were protected by a robot army, didn't I? (It's just a scenario)
'The Table' must have created this system for a reason, which is probably reducing overpopulation and taking most of the remaining resources for themselves.
There is no war, climate change is under control, nature is recovering.
The wealthy saw that humanity was destroying itself, Mars turned out to be
just a fantasy, so they acted to save themselves, with totalitarianism.
Will you join the big spenders? It depends a bit on your age, right?
As a young person, you would feel a lot different about it, than as an older person.
I designed this scenario to contain lots of shitty dilemmas.
So, what do you do?
Newly released documents from the U.S. Department of Justice provide additional details about Jeffrey Epstein’s final hours at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York, raising fresh questions about the official account of his death.
What the Video Logs Show
The surveillance logs note a flash of an orange-colored shape moving near Epstein’s cell tier around 10:39 p.m., the night before he was found dead. The logs describe it as unusual, but interpretations differ:
- The FBI log suggested it could have been an inmate.
- The Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) said it might have been a corrections officer carrying bedding or performing routine duties.
Why the Public Has Not Seen the Footage
The frames showing this activity were never released to the public, because they occurred during a brief camera reset. Authorities describe this as routine technical downtime for the surveillance system, but the timing has fueled skepticism. Observers note that the unusual activity coincides exactly with a moment when the camera was offline, creating a gap in the visual record that cannot be independently verified.
Limited Camera Angles and Ambiguities
Even for footage that exists, the camera covering the stairwell and cell tier provided only a single, partially obstructed angle. Analysts have noted that this makes it difficult to clearly identify anyone approaching the cell, further complicating interpretations of the unusual movement logged that night.
Discrepancies in Guard Reports
Interviews with the corrections officers on duty, Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, reveal gaps in memory and inconsistencies in inmate counts. Both had previously faced charges (later dropped) related to falsifying records. While these discrepancies do not prove foul play, they contribute to ongoing public concern about the circumstances of Epstein’s death.
Timeline and Official Narrative Remain Unchanged
Official records maintain that Epstein was discovered dead the following morning and that his death was ruled a suicide. No medical examiner or DOJ statement has formally revised the cause of death. However, the newly released logs and internal descriptions provide additional detail that was previously invisible to the public, leaving open questions about timeline, surveillance gaps, and activity near Epstein’s cell.
Why This Matters
While there is still no direct evidence of murder, the combination of missing video, unusual movement near his cell, and inconsistencies in officer reporting makes the events of that night harder to fully verify. These details underscore the lingering uncertainty surrounding Epstein’s death and explain why the case continues to attract intense public scrutiny.
Evidence also has sources, which are evidence for the evidence being real.
You can convict the ones who killed him, and find the reason for it.
People who are likely to have dirt on powerful people keep ending up dead.
That's not acceptable. Those powerful people need to face the law.
We cannot have powerful people doing whatever they want, to whoever they want.
That's one of the most important principles that your founding fathers wrote in
The Constitution. It's why Lady Liberty wears a blindfold. Do you still remember?
Jeffrey Epstein) Dated (One Day) Before His Death
only registered users can see external links
Newly released Epstein files include a draft statement attributed to federal prosecutors that is dated the day before Jeffrey Epstein was found dead.
The draft appears among at least 23 documents in the disclosure labeled as statements from the Southern District of New York’s U.S. Attorney’s Office.
One draft bears a date of Aug. 9, 2019, the day before Epstein was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.
New Comment Go to top