#beer review blog | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

canonicallyobserving911 · 1 year

Text

Buck & Eddie: In 6x13... no one in The Buckley-Diaz Family sat on Buck’s couch

In 6x13 “Mixed Feelings” not only did Buck, Eddie and Chris stay in the kitchen area of Buck’s loft, they DID NOT sit on the couch and as a matter of fact, the camera angles remained focused on the kitchen while no other part of Buck’s loft was shown. I noticed this while I was live blogging Monday night, I made a brief post about it and after further review of the episode, I realized Buck’s couch wasn’t shown at all in 6x13. It was interesting especially since his living room area has been shown several times throughout season 6.

6x1 “Let the Games Begin”

While Buck was cooking dinner and talking to Eddie about Bobby not choosing either of them to be interim captain, Chris said, “Buck, you don’t even have a couch” and the camera panned towards Buck’s living room to show the empty space where his black leather couch previously sat.

6x4 “Animal Instincts”

His living room was shown when he told Connor and Kameron he would be their sperm donor and it was also shown earlier during the episode when Connor showed up to tell him he didn’t have to do it even though it was clear he wanted him to.

6x8 “9-1-1 What’s Your Fantasy?”

There were several clear shots of Buck’s living room when Maddie and Chimney took Jee-Yun over there so Buck could babysit her for them while they went house hunting.

6x11 “In Another Life”

After Buck was discharged from the hospital, his mother insisted she was going to buy him a couch. She did but it wasn’t shown in his loft until 6x12 “Recovery”.

6x12 “Recovery”

Buck couldn’t get comfortable on his new couch and people wouldn’t stop coming to his loft unannounced. The couch his mother purchased was never shown up close and even when he was lying on it, it could barely be seen. Up to that point, every time Buck’s living room was shown, no couch was included.

Buck went to Eddie’s and after he sat down on their Eddie’s couch, he immediately fell asleep.

Eddie let Buck sleep and after he woke up, he went into the kitchen to talk to Eddie.

Eddie asked Buck if he wanted a beer but Buck said he’d rather have some water (related post linked here). Even after Buck sat down at the kitchen table, their Eddie’s couch could still be seen. Reminder, Eddie’s kitchen has a door that’s been closed before by his ex-girlfriend after he broke up with her so it was a CHOICE to keep the door open so the couch could be seen.

6x13 “Mixed Feelings”

While Eddie and Chris were in Buck’s loft with him, the camera angles REMAINED focused on the kitchen and the dinning room table where they were sitting. Buck’s new couch was never shown even though it could be seen several times in 6x12 while Hen was visiting him and they sat at the table eating the pot roast Maddie made for his lunch.

At the end of the episode, while Buck and Chris were preparing to bake cookies, the camera REMAINED focused on the kitchen area again and it didn’t show Buck’s couch.

Eddie and Chris sat on Buck’s couch with him in 3x9 “Fallout”, Chris sat on it in 3x1 “Kids Today” and he sat on it again in 4x8 “Breaking Point”, therefore it was a CHOICE to keep the camera angles focused on the kitchen area while they were there in 6x13.

It’s certainly possible this could be a coincidence but that’s very unlikely especially since both Athena and Karen have mentioned in CANON the lack of belief in coincidences. Also, the camera angles were PURPOSEFULLY positioned to stay focused on Buck, Eddie and Chris at the beginning of the episode even though it could have been placed in the kitchen like it was in 6x4, 6x8 and 6x12 to show Buck’s living room but it wasn’t.

Both the showrunner and OS have mentioned in separate interviews Buck’s new couch will meet an unlikely end sometime before the end of the season so it remains to be seen what will happen to it. Since it wasn’t shown at all while Buck, Eddie and Chris were there, it further illustrates the couch metaphor and how it relates to Buck finding his couch/relationship at Eddie’s house.

Will he find his couch before the end of season 6? Only the showrunner(s), writers and producers know the answer to that question.

#buddie #eddie diaz #evan buckley #christopher diaz #the buckley diaz family #buckley diaz family #911 fox #911 on fox #911onfox #911 meta #911 s6 #911 season 6 #911 season 6 speculation #911 #911 on abc #911 abc

166 notes · View notes

pix4japan · 8 months

Text

A Mama-san's Oasis: A Warm Glow in Yokohama's Nightlife

Location: Yokohamabashi, Minami Ward, Yokohama, Japan Timestamp: 18:46 on December 19, 2023

Fujifilm X100V with 5% diffusion filter ISO 160 for 1.0 sec. at ƒ/5.6 Astia/Soft film simulation

While you might feel a bit hesitant to step into this tavern due to its lack of reviews, location on a dark alleyway, absence of a website, and minimal presence on Google Maps, a delightful surprise awaits you upon entering, where you'll be warmly greeted by the sweet, elderly Mama-san who runs the well-kept and clean pub.

The establishment is a unique blend, functioning both as an izakaya, offering a diverse range of foods that go well with Japanese sake, shochu or beer, and as a bar for those seeking a purely drink-centric experience.

Once inside, you'll find a long, narrow space divided by a counter with seven seats. As soon as you step in, the regulars are eager to strike up a conversation (in Japanese), creating an easygoing atmosphere to connect with your new drinking buddies. (Non-alcoholic drinks are also available.)

While the food may lean towards the pricey side, every dish is lovingly home-cooked by the Mama-san and boasts a delicious flavor. Notably, the prices for the sashimi (sliced raw fish) are competitive with other local taverns and sashimi restaurants.

Personally, I plan to return with my camera on a quieter day, hoping to capture the charm of the interior and perhaps gain the Mama-san's trust to photograph both the shop and her in action.

Explore other shops near Yokohamabashi Shotengai, and find references to related articles for further reading on my blog post: https://www.pix4japan.com/blog/20231219-yokohamabashi

#ストリートスナップ #居酒屋 #昭和レトロ #横浜橋商店街 #横浜 #pix4japan #Fujifilm #X100V #street photography #Japan #Yokohama #Yokohamabashi #Izakaya

17 notes · View notes

johnschneiderblog · 6 months

Text

The eclipse, the fish and the fog

One more eclipse post (though I’m not promising you it’s the last one; I’m reserving the right to review today's big show in Tuesday’s blog):

On Aug. 17, 2017 (the date of the previous total solar eclipse), I had a little brainstorm. We were at the lake. It was salmon season. It’s a well-known fact that salmon prefer to feed in low-light conditions.

See where I'm going with this ...? I reasoned that if the fish fed at sunrise and sundown, why not sun-eclipsed ?

Around lunch time, Sharon and I set out on Lake Huron with sandwiches and beer. The lake was unusually calm. We figured that even if my theory was faulty, it was good day for a boat ride.

As the afternoon went dark, a thick fog ambushed us, so the eclipse itself was a bust. However, within 10 minutes of setting our lines, we had a salmon in the boat.

I wouldn't call it proof, exactly, but I would call it dinner.

#John Schneider #Sharon #Lake Huron #2017 solar eclpse #feeding in low light

17 notes · View notes

amalepregnancyworld · 2 years

Text

I posted 87 times in 2022

72 posts created (83%)

15 posts reblogged (17%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@amalepregnancyworld

@bellis-baby

@lyricmpreg

@hinchados

@andrewmpreg

I tagged 84 of my posts in 2022

Only 3% of my posts had no tags

#mpreg - 80 posts

#male pregnancy - 74 posts

#gay - 66 posts

#pregnant man - 57 posts

#mpreg roleplay - 56 posts

#belly - 54 posts

#beer belly - 51 posts

#dad bod - 50 posts

#pregnant guy - 50 posts

#morph - 44 posts

Longest Tag: 29 characters

#trans rights are human rights

My Top Posts in 2022:

188 notes - Posted February 9, 2022

245 notes - Posted May 15, 2022

See the full post

321 notes - Posted June 28, 2022

327 notes - Posted January 1, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

See the full post

724 notes - Posted May 4, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

#tumblr2022 #year in review #my 2022 tumblr year in review #your tumblr year in review

100 notes · View notes

nickim93 · 2 years

Text

#a&w #a&w root beer #a&w frozen root beer #frozen root beer #root beer #drink #drink review #blog #blogger #blog link #blogger link #my personal blog #personal blog #relatable

3 notes · View notes

stylized-corpse · 8 months

Text

My old blog @stylizedcorpse had 1200 followers and was nuked by Tumblr, but now I'm back, with a fancy hyphen.

Hey, name's Greg (he/they). I like metal, punk, and goth stuff and other things of that nature. Appreciator of fantasy and sci fi fiction, horror, art, history, insects, beer, and smut. Leftist libertine. Nazi punks fuck off. Check out all my other shit down below: Blogs: Heavy NFLD [news covering the metal/punk scene in Newfoundland] Where Strides the Behemoth [album/movie/media review blog]

Other Tumblrs: Mistwalker [official Tumblr for my band] Akhenaten Art [art blog] Heavy NFLD [official Tumblr for Heavy NFLD]

Other Social Media: Personal Twitter Last.fm DeviantArt

My Music (Main Projects): Mistwalker [blackened heavy metal] Ratpiss [powerviolence]

My Music (Side Projects): Cemetery Hill [goth rock/post punk] Cult of Azura [Elder Scrolls-themed black metal] Fucked to Death [sex-positive pornogrind] Gamma Knife [thrash metal] Goddammit [hardcore punk] Grimacing [satirical DSBM] Icefog [ambient/wintersynth] Impaled Upon the Mountains [black metal] Lucifairy [doom metal] Sarcophagon [death metal] Trinidad Gunfight [stoner rock] Wavering Radiant [neofolk]

YouTube Channels: Greg Ravengrave [personal channel] Distortion MTL [full live punk/metal shows I film in the MTL area] Heavy NFLD [archive of heavy music from Newfoundland]

DailyMotion Channels: Misty Walker [gaming channel]

#personal bullshit #me

16 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 1 year

Text

How tech does regulatory capture

If you want to know which industries have the most influence in DC, study the trade deals struck by the US Trade Representative, whose activities are the most obvious manifestation of American corporate power over state. Take the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). As David Dayen notes, this treaty is a kind of Big Tech wishlist:

https://prospect.org/power/2023-04-18-big-tech-lobbyists-took-over-washington/

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/18/cursed-are-the-sausagemakers/#how-the-parties-get-to-yes

The USTR’s playbook has changed over the years, reflecting the degree of control over the US government exerted by different sectors of the US economy. Today, with Big Tech in the driver’s seat, US trade deals embody something called the “digital trade agenda,” a mix of policies ranging from limiting liability, privacy protection, competition law, and data locatization.

The Digital Trade Agenda is a relatively new phenomenon. A decade ago, when the USTR went abroad to twist the arms of America’s trading partners, the only “digital” part of the agenda was obligations to spy on users and to swiftly remove materials claimed to have violated US media monopolies’ copyright. But as the tech sector grew more concentrated, they were able to seize a greater share America’s trade priorities.

One person who had a front-row seat for this transformation was Wendy Li, a PhD candidate in sociology at the University of Wisconsin, who served in the USTR’s office from 2015–17, and who leveraged her contacts among officials and lobbyists (and ex-lobbyists turned officials and vice-versa) to produce a fascinating, ethnographic account of a very specific form of regulatory capture. That account appears in “Regulatory Capture’s Third Face of Power,” in Socio-Economic Review. The article is paywalled, but if you access it via this link, you can bypass the paywall:

https://pluralistic.net/wendi-li-reg-capture

Li’s paper starts with a taxonomy of types of regulatory capture, drawn from the literature. The first kind — the “first face of power” — is when an industry wins some battle over a given policy, triumphing over the public interest. Li notes that defining “public interest” is sometimes tricky, which is true, but still, there are some obvious examples of this kind of capture.

My “favorite” example of horrible regulatory capture is from 2019, when Dow Chemical — working through the West Virginia Manufacturers Association — convinced the state of West Virginia to relax the limits on how much toxic runoff from chemical processing could be present in the state’s drinking water. Dow argued that the national safe levels reflected a different kind of person from the typical West Virginian. Specifically, Dow argued, the people of West Virginia were much fatter than other Americans, so their bodies could absorb more poison without sickening. And besides, Dow concluded, West Virginians drink beer, not water, so poisoning their drinking water wouldn’t affect them:

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/03/14/the-real-elitists-looking-down-on-trump-voters/

This isn’t even a little ambiguous. Dow’s pleading wasn’t just absurd on its face — it was also scientifically bankrupt — there’s no evidence that being overweight makes you less susceptible to carcinogens. And yet, the state regulator bought it. Why? Well, maybe because chemical processing is WV’s largest industry, and Dow is the largest chemical company in the state. Regulatory capture, in other words.

The second kind of regulatory capture is the “revolving door”: when an executive from industry rotates into a role in government, where they are expected to guard the public interest from their former employers. There’s some of this in every presidential administration — think of Obama’s ex-Morganstanley and ex-Goldmansachs finance officials.

But while Obama and other “normal” pols sketched their corruption with a fine-tipped pen, making the overall shape hard to discern, Trump scrawled large, crude, unmissable figures with a fisted Sharpie. Remember Scott Pruitt, the disgraced Trump EPA who wanted to abolish the EPA? Pruitt was was such a colossal asshole that even the lobbyists who’d been bribing him with free housing actually evicted him:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/06/politics/pruitt-trump/index.html

After Pruitt resigned in the midst of chaotic scandal, he was succeeded by his deputy, Andrew Wheeler — a former coal lobbyist:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/climate/scott-pruitt-epa-trump.html

That’s the “second face of power.” What’s the third? It’s taking over the shape of the debate, getting to define its axioms. Think of the reflexive idea that government projects are “wasteful” and “inefficient.” Once all players internalize this idea, the debate shifts from “what should the public sector do?” to “which private-sector entity should the government pay to do this?” Anyone who says, “Wait, why doesn’t the government just do this?” just gets blank stares.

We can see this in the cramped and inadequate debate over the SVB bailout; apologists for the bailout insist that it was necessary because if SVB’s depositors had been forced to take a haircut, every large depositor in America would pile into Morganstanley, making it so “too big to fail” that it could tank the nation.

This is probably true — but only if you discount the possibility of establishing a public bank. Public banks are hardly a radical idea: America had nationwide public banking through the postal service until 1966:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/15/socialism-for-the-rich/#rugged-individualism-for-the-poor

Li summarizes: “the first face of power is measured through the winner of the game, and the second face of power can be understood as the referee. The third face of power is the field, the rulebook, and agreement that there is even a game at all.”

It’s the creation of this third face that Li’s paper dissects — the creation of “Type I” ideas that form the unquestioned assumptions for all other debate. Sociologist call these ideas “schemas.” Li describes two ways that the tech industry changed the schemas used in trade negotiations. First, schemas are changed through “knowledge production” — creating reports and data.

Second, schemas are embedded through “recursive institutional reproduction” — a bit of unfortunately opaque academic jargon that is roughly equivalent to what activists call “policy laundering.” That’s when an industry can’t get its way in its home country, so it leans on trade reps to include that policy in a treaty or trade deal, which transforms it into an obligation at home.

In tech policy, the Ur-example of this is the DMCA, a 1998 digital copyright law that has profoundly changed the way we relate to everything from online services to our coffee makers. The origins of the DMCA are wild. In 1991, Al Gore kicked off the National Information Infrastructure hearings — AKA the “Information Superhighway” project. One of the most prominent proposals for the future of the internet came from Bruce Lehman, Bill Clinton’s Copyrigh tCzar. Lehman had been the head of IP enforcement for Microsoft, and he had some genuinely batshit ideas for the internet, like requiring a separate, negotiated copyright license for every transitory copy made by RAM, or a network buffer, or drive cache:

https://www.wired.com/1996/01/white-paper/

Gore laughed Lehman out of the room and told him to hit the road. So Lehman did, scurrying over to Geneva, where he turned his batshit ideas into the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). Then he raced back to DC where he told Congress that they had to get on board with those UN treaties. In 1998, Congress passed the DMCA, turning a failed regulatory policy into a federal law that endures to this day.

That’s “policy laundering.” Lehman couldn’t get his ideas though the US government, so he rammed them through a UN agency, converting his proposal into an obligation, which Congress duly assumed.

The Digital Trade Agenda triumphed by both knowledge production and recursive institutional reproduction (AKA policy laundering). Under Obama, trade officials created the Digital Trade Working Group in consultation with industry, through the US Chamber of Commerce. This group worked with the US International Trade Commission (USITC) — a quasi-governmental research body — to produce copious reports, testimony and data in support of a focus on “digital trade.”

In particular, they inflated the value of digital trade to US officials, convincing them that getting wins for the digital industry would have an outsized impact on the US economy. This is reflected in the terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal that was negotiated in the utmost secrecy, in hotels all over the world surrounded by armed guards, where neither the press nor activists were welcome.

TPP represented a kind of farcical wishlist for America’s corporate giants, including the tech sector, and it looked like a done deal — until Trump. Trump unilaterally withdrew from TPP, so the tech industry’s reps simply tacked around TPP. They took everything they’d wanted to get out of TPP and crammed it into the USMCA, Trump’s rewrite of NAFTA. This makes perfect sense — corporate America’s priority was TPP’s policies, not TPP itself.

Li’s paper doesn’t just document this shift, she also gives us interviews with (anonymized) officials and lobbyists who speak frankly about how this happened behind the scenes. For example, a former Commerce official turned tech lobbyist describes how he lobbies his former coworkers: “Sometimes, [meetings are like] hey, let’s grab lunch, let’s grab coffee, and catch up. And half of it is about our kids, and half of it is about this [work related issue]. We’ll have a formal meeting [with government officials], but obviously we chitchat before and after. Because we’re human. So, a lot of it is just normal human interaction, right?”

This social coziness lets lobbyists position themselves as “stakeholders,” which legitimizes — and even requires — their participation in policymaking. As a trade negotiator says, “So to get your handle on a problem, you’ve got to pull the right people together, and you’ve got to sift through all the various ideas, so we obviously have a lot of regular interaction with companies [. . .] I spend a lot of time with the companies trying to understand their business model, try ing to understand how they interact with the governments in different countries, and then of course, socializing it within the building.”

Once lobbyists are “stakeholders,” they get to define not just what position the US takes — they get to define which positions can even be considered. As a trade negotiator says, “[Lobbyists aren’t] coming in and spouting talking points. They’re not giving us draft text because we haven’t gotten to the text phase yet. The way these meetings go is, generally we provide an update on what is happening and what approach we’re taking. The remainder is usually devoted to companies talking about their particular interests, and inquiring as to whether and how their issues are being addressed in that forum.”

That’s not just winning the game — it’s defining the rules.

Li’s paper is a fascinating tour of the sausage-factory and a close examination of the gunk that litters the factory floor. That said, I think there are areas where she drops policies and fights into neat categories that are much messier. For example, Li contrasts the rules in TPP with the rules in ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a failed international treaty from 2010.

Li characterizes ACTA as being an anti-tech proposal because it imposed copyright liability on tech companies, which would have raised their costs by forcing them to police their users’ speech, items for sale and uploads for copyright infringement. But that’s not quite right: ACTA was much broader. First, because “counterfeiting” doesn’t mean what you think it does: in an international trade agreement, counterfeiting concerns itself with all kinds of totally legitimate activities.

For example, Apple engraves microscopic Apple logos on every part in an iPhone; no user ever sees these parts. But Apple uses the presence of an Apple trademark on these tiny components to lodge trademark claims with US border officials in order to block the importation of parts harvested from dead iPhones, as part of the company’s war on repair:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/30/80-lbs/#malicious-compliance

Likewise, companies like Rolex and Cartier have national subsidiaries in countries all over the world with the exclusive license to sell their goods in each country. These companies then claim that, say, an official Mexican Rolex watch becomes a counterfeit Rolex the minute it crosses the US border, because Rolex Mexico doesn’t have the right to use Rolex International’s trademarks outside of Mexico.

Asking tech companies to police “counterfeits” isn’t just about stopping knockoffs — it’s about letting multinational corporations control all secondary markets for their goods, giving them total control over repair and used goods.

Beyond that: creating an affirmative duty for platforms to police their users’ uploads and speech for copyright infringement is one of those things that not only won’t prevent copyright infringement (beating filters is easy for dedicated copyright infringers), but it will also compromise users’ speech (because filters are rife with false positives) — and it will hand eternal dominance to the largest tech firms (both Youtube and Facebook support mandatory filters, because they’ve spent hundreds of millions on them, and know that their small rivals can’t).

ACTA wasn’t a way to “punish” tech to make life better for media companies — it was a way to shift some of the oligarchic control of both tech and media around, while shoring up its dominance. Yes, parts of the tech sector hated ACTA, but it died because millions of people campaigned against it.

And of course, ACTA got policy-laundered into law in 2019, when the EU adopted the Digital Single Market Directive and created a filtering mandate, ignoring the largest petition in EU history and the people who marched in 50 cities. That was recursive institutional reproduction in action all right.

Likewise, TPP can’t be understood as the tech sector sidelining the entertainment companies — because both of them rallied for the parts of TPP that feathered all their nests. For example, the entertainment sector and the tech sector both love rules against reverse-engineers (like Section 1201 of the DMCA), which make it a felony to unlock your books, music, games and videos from the store that sold them to you and take them with you to another player.

Tech loves this because it gets them lock-in — if you break up with Amazon, you have to kiss your Kindle and Audible books goodbye. Media loves it because it gives them control — DRM stops you from recording Christmas movies between Feb and Dec, when they come free with your streaming service, and that means you have to pay-per-view them in December, when you want to watch them.

In other words, the Big Tech and Big Content’s policy fights aren’t so much about which policies we get — they’re about who gets to profit from them. They both want the same stuff — no taxes, no unions, no minimum wage, no consumer rights, no privacy — but they each want to hoard the benefits from that stuff.

Both tech and media love “IP” — not in the sense of “copyright” or “trademark,” but in the sense of “any law that lets me control the conduct of my competitors, critics and customers”:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

In USMCA, it wasn’t just the “Digital Trade Agenda” that made it into the final agreement — it was mandatory DRM laws, massive copyright extensions, and the evisceration of fair use and its equivalents in Mexico and Canada:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/08/01/set-healthy-boundaries/#la-ley

There’s another important factor missing from Li’s analysis of the rise of the Digital Trade Agenda: monopoly. Tech used to be composed of hundreds of competing firms that hated each other’s guts and were incapable of working together. The entertainment industry, by contrast, was already hugely consolidated and able to lobby effectively as a body.

That was hugely important in the Napster Wars, when international copyright proposals like the Database Right and the Broadcast Treaty were popping up at the UN and in country-to-country trade deals. While the tech industry was competing to give users a better deal, Big Content was able to solve the collective action problem and come up with a common lobbying position, getting nearly identical (and absolutely ghastly) tech bills introduced in dozens of state legislatures at once:

https://web.archive.org/web/20030425210736/https://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/states/200304_sdmca_eff_analysis.php

The rise of the Digital Trade Agenda is downstream of tech industry consolidation, the orgy of mergers that saw the internet transformed into “five giant websites, each filled with screenshots of text from the other four”:

https://twitter.com/tveastman/status/1069674780826071040

Li’s taxonomy of regulatory capture is useful and important, and it’s complimented by an analysis of failures in antitrust enforcement. Market consolidation has produced firms that are more powerful than the governments that are supposed to keep them honest. When the teams have more power than the ref, the game will never be fair:

https://doctorow.medium.com/small-government-fd5870a9462e

The tech industry aren’t really adverse to the entertainment industry, at least not where it counts. They are all part of the business lobby, whose regulatory priorities are broadly shared, even if they disagree at the margins. Dayen describes how the Digital Trade Agenda is playing out in IPEF, the treaty with more than a dozen Pacific Rim countries: “It would prohibit governments from reviewing or prescreening algorithms for violations of labor law, competition policy, or nondiscrimination statutes. It would bar limitations on data flows or storage. And it would treat policies that have greater impacts on the large tech firms as illegal trade barriers. These terms could block signatory countries from writing laws that take on any of these issues.”

Those aren’t tech priorities — those are corporate priorities. The success of the “Digital Trade Agenda” isn’t just because tech grew up and started lobbying — it’s because the things they lobby for are the things every business wants: no labor protection, no antitrust, no privacy.

That’s the “schema” that matters: the bedrock assumption that job of US trade policy is to make sure that workers and residents abroad have no rights, with the obligation on America to dismantle the few rights that remain intact in its borders to satisfy the “obligation” it actually insisted on.

Later this week (Apr 20/21), I’m speaking in Chicago at the Stigler Center’s Antitrust and Competition Conference.

This weekend (Apr 22/23), I’m at the LA Times Festival of Books.

[Image ID: The Milky Way. Standing to the left of the frame is a giant ogrish figure, a top-hatted, cigar-chomping caricature of a capitalist. He emerges from behind a silhouetted tree, towering over it. With one white-gloved hand, he is yanking a golden, dollar-sign-shaped lever at a control box. With the other hand, he disdainfully dangles a 'big blue marble' image of Earth from space. The starry sky is partially blended with a green-on-black 'code waterfall' effect in the style of the Matrix movie open credits. The ogre's eyes have been replaced with the glaring red eyes of HAL9000 from Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey.']

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

—

Andy (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Milky_Way_and_Andromeda_Galaxies.jpg

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

42 notes · View notes

crazymuff1n · 1 year

Text

ok heres my pitch for a new how i met your mother episode thats like a pride special or whatever

Barney hears his brother(gay) make a joke about how "they/them dick hits different" so Barney naturally figures that they/them pussy is also different, and then proceeds to pickup and have sex with one them/them individual and gives his review and rating. Ted however, in professor mode says that basing his assumption on one trial is unscientific (can't be published on his blog), and he needs more thussy (short for they/them pussy)

"challenge accepted" "its not a challenge" "I, Barney Stinson, will dedicate this pride month to sleeping with every they/them person i come (self-high five) across"

Next day he wears a prideflag tie and has a blue wig sticking out of his pocket (laugh track)

We see him coming around with what do the audience appears as just, average cis women. Ted at one point says "she" and he gets kicked so hard by Barney for cockblocking that he is seen lumping out of the booth when picking up some beers. Also several of the flirt with Robin. Some of them mention the hockey team she played for when she was younger and lived in canada. saying they were a big fan of her.

A whole sequence is spent in a bro-meeting asking if they/them lesbians/bisexuals should count in the "always let a woman go if she is trying to have sex with another woman" bro-code rule

At one point Ted questions his morality of sleeping with queer folk and Barney says "THEODORE" "That's not my na-" "how DARE you say that nonbinary people dont deserve love? dont deserve sex (wtih me?) I am going to spend this whole pride month giving every enby i can my love! for shame, Ted, for shame"

afterwards the people he is hooking up with gradually start to fall more in to the "blue hair and pronouns" trope

one of the hookups mentions their friend who uses xe/xer pronouns and Barney faints from realizing there's more and he wakes up in a hospital (he fell down the stairs) the nurse is distinctly similar to last sequence of enbies, and also hot. He looks at the camera and smirks. even though he is in a cast. the end (laugh track)

also as a B-plot Lily and Marshal are discussing how to handle potential future queer children and they go to discussing names and marshall keeps trying to insist that they should totally encourage their kid to have a name like bonecrusher while lily is leaning more towards normal human names.

also at some point theres a joke about being attacked by a bear and the cutaway flashback uses that one shitty bear costume but then its corrected to "gay bear" cutaway to the same bear but with leather "no the OTHER gay bear" cutaway to human gay bear

#post fresh from the muff1n bakery #how i met your mother #himym #196 #rule #listen if you somehow recognize this post its because i posted it in my blog that got deleted okay #might as well repost it almost word for word because funny

18 notes · View notes

nobodysdaydreams · 11 months

Text

DUCK BOY IS PUTTING HIS TRUST IN THE WRONG PERSON, BUT I DON’T CARE CAUSE HE APPARENTLY BLEW UP A HOSPITAL.

ALSO: IS LOVELACE AN ALIEN? (or my reaction to episodes 35-37 of Wolf359, plus the end credits scene).

Welcome back dear readers. Thanks again for your patience. Very excited for this end credits scene 👀

Tagging the mutuals who got me invested in this, and if you want to be tagged or untagged from these posts, lmk, or you can follow my blog or simply follow the tag "#bods wolf359 reactions". Anyone who has followed me for a while knows my updates are inconsistent, so I apologize in advance for that and for any spelling/grammar mistakes in my posts.

@sophieswundergarten @oflightningandstars @acollectionofcuriousreblogs @herawell @commsroom

Episode 35: Need to Know

Oh boy. A Kepler episode. 😒

“Are we blowing up?” sad that this has become a routine question.

“certain questions only lead to pain” very true.

“head of I don’t give care do your job department” Well Kepler, maybe I’m the head of the throwing you out the airlock department.

Kepler man you gotta give them better info. The lack of trust is insane. “Don’t forget where you are, I will give you a gruesome death.”

Doug. Doug. Do not trust Kepler.

Do not trust the evil Whiskey man.

oh shut it Jacobi. Every time you speak, you take-

Wait. Hera? HERA?

New file? Emergency scenario?

THE BLACK ARCHIVES AGAIN. 👀

“A violation of Kepler’s trust”. Well, I for one do not think Kepler’s trust is worth anything.

oh my gosh are they trying to tear the Hephaestus crew apart by reviewing their dirty secrets?

This is so sneaky and coordinated. I hate Maxwell and Jacobi so much.

DO NOT MOCK MINKOWSKI FOR HER LOVE OF SHOW TUNES JACOBI!

I want Maxwell and Jacobi to join Kepler in his airlock. For those of you who love SI-5, fear not. I will pack them plenty of Whiskey for the journey.

Fear of… ducks? 🦆 Well. I suppose we found his weakness. See Jacobi you shouldn’t have mocked the show tunes.

Restraining order? What’s up with Maxwell’s families?

A BET?

An internet scam? I don’t care if this is Jacobi pretending to be stupid, he’s perfect for the role. Maybe the airlock will be a merciful death for him. No ducks in space.

Uh… what report is that? Hera?

Oh my gosh is it the ducks again? “Hostile assault on senses?” What does that mean? Snoring? Well, that’s bad.

They got dirt on Kepler now? 👀 Oh. He likes expensive skiing. ⛷️

Wait. We can use this. Maybe we can sabotage his skis. Cause a little accident.

Hera wouldn’t try to kill you! She just wants free will!

“Oh boo hoo I killed a plant. At least I didn’t drug my fellow crew members.” shut up duck boy.

DUCK BOY BLEW UP A HOSPITAL?

I respectfully disagree. These holes are not equally deep. Minkowski loves theater, and Hera just wants free will. Duck boy blew up a hospital.

What’s the file? Her husband better not be dead. Oh is this about Doug?

That was about Doug wasn’t it? Whatever crime he did? The reason he doesn’t talk to his family?

Yikes. Doug what did you do?

Aw Doug. Thank you for apologizing. See Minkowski? He cares about you. He’s not a monster, even if he did do a bad thing.

That’s the real reason Kepler, Jacobi, and Maxwell did this isn’t it? So that they’d lose trust in Doug?

Jacobi shut up. Kidnapping? Child endangerment?

That doesn’t sound good. Was this a custody arrangement gone wrong? That’s my best guess so far. Cause that, plus the family stuff seems like a custody arrangement gone wrong. He mentioned cigarettes and beer a lot so maybe there were substance abuse issues.

But… if I’m right…that means that Doug… has a kid. A kid he probably misses and regrets hurting. And they made HIM answer questions from third graders.

If that’s true they’re awful. I mean, we already knew that, but yikes.

“What about you? Are you going to care? Goodnight 🥰” shut up duck boy. Episode 36: Fire and Brimestone Oh dear is this the Spider lab? 🕷️ It better not be.

“Too early?” You’re in space there is no morning.

“How did they survive without an engineer?” they weren’t supposed to Maxwell, you know that. What you also don’t know is how smart they are.

SL7? Haven’t used it for much? Why do the ships have so many weird and ominous rooms?

“and that’s…bad???… which means???…” me too Doug, me too.

Oh great Duck Boy gets more dynamite. 🧨

Minkowski call him out. And duck boy, no one cares about you.

“Maybe we don’t have to get her out” Exactly what I’ve been saying! Let her go. I wish it was Mr. Duck Boy or Discount Cutter: Whiskey Edition, but at least we could eliminate one problem.

“How do we make this call?” Well, this episode title seems to have done that. I see this as a win. Maxie survives, she gets a shot a redemption. She dies eh… it’s a bit like this hot chocolate I have in my hands. /j

“I couldn’t care less what Kepler thinks” I don’t either, let’s drown him in Whiskey 🥰

What thought? WHAT THOUGHT? Leaving Maxwell to die or killing her?

Look Doug. 99% of the time, I don’t like or go with the murder plan. But you’re in space. They could say you died up here and no investigation would take place. We don’t know what Cutter is doing, but we DO know who is cool with murder for their ambition, and who won’t stop until they get what they want. Other lives are at risk. Maybe thousands. Maybe the whole world if aliens get involved. You need to think about that.

Minkowski. Do not hold that over him. It’s private. You don’t know what happened. Neither do I, I’m making an assumption, but based on evidence presented, I think it’s a decent guess.

“Impossibly smart.” Mr. Duck Boy can be good at explosives but that doesn’t make him smart.

Did they program Hera to snitch? I hate them. I hate the whole SI-5.

I don’t like this. If Kepler hurts Minkowski I swear…

Your hand is not forced Kepler. No one is making you kill. That’s your choice.

I’d trust Doug over Hilbert.

“Then we all go together”. I love Doug the most.

But we still need a plan to kill Discount Cutter. And Duck Boy.

Critical condition? Poor Maxwell. But this isn’t gonna be good for Minkowski. She was only trying to help.

Yeah… it’s weird that they were that perfect. Almost like the stupid boy thing was a front to get you to put your guard down. But I still consider him incompetent.

They better not lock Minkowski in solitary. The last friendly warning? Whiskey boy, nothing about you is friendly. I hate him. Episode 37: Overture Off goes the probe. I wonder if it will find anything.

Sorry I’m doing chores while listening to this one, so reaction might be a bit brief.

Ugh. Of course Duck Boy is the favorite 🙄

THE MUSIC IS BACK! 🎶🎶🎶 And um… more sounds? Concerning sounds? Scary sounds? Very scary sounds?

Oh not the star again.

Translate from her thought stream? Binary code? Yeah, how do we know she’s actually translating.

Good idea Hera. Say something only Doug would know.

Oh more music. 🎶

Good work Doug. Don’t trust Maxwell. She makes you dependent on her to get to Hera, and then lulls you into a false sense of security.

Aliens leaving messages in music? I SAID THIS ON DAY ONE.

Kepler ought to shut his face. Using her love of space and her care for her crew against her? Perhaps the airlock is too merciful for Whiskey boy.

I did ride space mountain once. I didn’t like it.

I bet they did three months until the next episode too.

Now for that end credits scene 👀

I don’t hear anything.

Oh? Cutter’s telephone line?

Yep.

Huh. Jacobi and Maxwell aren’t deep on the inside. Seems like Duck Boy and Dr. Robot are also being played. Interesting…

…but here’s a question for you Kepler. Hilbert thought he was in the inner circle. You laughed because he’s not. Jacobi and Maxwell think they’re in the inner circle. You laugh because they’re not. You believe you are in the inner circle.

But how do you know there is not someone out there somewhere, laughing at you? And why would a man who knows so much about the dangers of space send up anyone he didn’t view as somewhat expendable?

Think about that Whiskey boy. Think about that.

Also: was Lovelace infected by the aliens? or did she make contact? Or is SHE the alien?

Well. I guess that’s all for now.

Thanks dear readers. Really getting through season 3 now. Excited to see what’s in store 👀

#bods wolf359 reactions #w359 #wolf 359 #hera wolf 359 #isabel lovelace #alexander hilbert #daniel jacobi #alana maxwell #doug eiffel #warren kepler #renee minkowski #wolf 359 hera #wolf 359 podcast #wolf 359 reaction

14 notes · View notes