Tbh I think the world was already laughing in 2016. Even back then Trump was an absolutely ridiculous candidate. The real joke, though, is that even after his disastrous tenure as president and despite all of his criminal dealings, Trump is running again (and will probably even win the election). That would be funny if it were just about what this fact says about the American electorate. But unfortunately, the USA is still the strongest military power in the world. So it’s not too funny for the rest of the world to have to worry about how to deal with an orange psychopath with a gigantic arsenal of weapons and enormous economic power. I therefore assume that at least the democratic rest of the world has stopped laughing by now.
I knew I was in the Twilight Zone when Trump, [a draft dodging rich boy who compared tomcatting around Manhattan in the 1970s with actually going to Vietnam ] talked about shit John McCain and wasn’t lynched by the GOP
No, you see, Trump isn’t a black man kneeling during the national anthem so he’s not being disrespectful at all. Honestly I’m surprised they don’t all have serious whiplash from that turn around.
This is the last one, I promise. It was just too funny to not include here.
Trump attorney Christopher Kise has just said that he may want to mention information barred by the gag order in a motion for a mistrial.
Alina Habba, another Trump lawyer, seems to confirm the team will make the motion and says they want to reference communications between Engoron and his law clerk.
The judge says he’ll allow Trump’s team to make that motion in writing.
“See, I knew there’d be a love fest,” Engoron concludes.
Fantastic video, but it winds me up when they add padding to a phone video to make it landscape, as if no one in existence might possibly be viewing their phone-generated content on a phone.
Yeah adding padding is always harmful. If the aspect ratio doesn’t match it’s not like the video breaks so just let the player deal with it. Anyone who has a problem with vertical videos isn’t going to be any happier that you added bars to it. Who is this solution for?
It’s because the content was likely preprocessed for broadcast news. Which means normal 16:9 landscape format.
Vertical video has done nothing but introduce constant issues. I used to be a guide for Jeep runs, and I was also the video editor for the run videos (just clips from the run with music). And naturally you can’t be everywhere, so 95% of the clips have to be recorded by everyone else. Even though they were told “don’t record vertical video because we can’t use it” they did so anyways, and were upset when we couldn’t use their videos.
And to be clear, this isn’t just a random video. We’re talking about a large organized and legally registered club, so we kept everything to a certain standard of quality. Vertical videos are not suitable for anything except a phone.
Why can’t you use it? Because your web designer isn’t designing for the possibility that people use a phone to access the Web, but it’s not 2004 any more and they’re living in the past.
You showed your colours when you assumed that portrait video is of lower quality. It’s only of lower quality if you’ve padded it out and are watching it on a landscape screen!
Technology to detect whether your webpage is being viewed landscape has existed for a long time, and takes very simple calculations indeed or just a splash or two of css to maximise the video size for whatever screen it’s being viewed on. It’s design laziness and wasted bandwidth to put the silly blurry bars or even black bars down the side of the video. But don’t force landscape on everyone. Smart phones aren’t new and they aren’t going away.
I suspect that the majority of people who spend even a tiny bit more than half of their recreational screen time looking at a fixed landscape screen are well over thirty.
Because TVs are landscape. These videos are shown at club events.
You showed your colours when you assumed that portrait video is of lower quality.
I never said it’s lower quality. Not once.
Technology to detect whether your webpage is being viewed landscape has existed for a long time, and takes very simple calculations indeed or just a splash or two of css to maximise the video size for whatever screen it’s being viewed on. It’s design laziness and wasted bandwidth to put the silly blurry bars or even black bars down the side of the video. But don’t force landscape on everyone. Smart phones aren’t new and they aren’t going away.
we kept everything to a certain standard of quality. Vertical videos are not suitable for anything except a phone.
Totally not lower quality. Definitely not. There’s a full stop and everything. No link whatsoever. My bad.
No one said anything about websites.
Well I think the rest of us are discussing a video on bbc.co.uk, which is a website, and we’re doing it on lemmy.world, which is also a website, and when I complained about people making portrait videos landscape, I suspect most people correctly figured out that I meant on websites, so I really think it’s just you that assumes we’re talking about your jeep club.
Watching portrait footage that’s been padded out to landscape on a portrait device is even worse!
I’m proposing that the web designer writes a responsive webpage when they are sent a portrait video to include, so that if it’s viewed on a portrait device it fills the width, and when it’s viewed on a landscape device it fills the height. If it’s actually for telly, there’s usually no harm in cropping a bit at the top and bottom and at that point, feel free to put whatever you like down the sides, but there’s no need to throw away the portrait original for the portrait view of the website.
Like I already said, the technology for writing a webpage that looks different depending on the orientation of the device being used to view it is neither complicated nor new. There’s no need to treat every medium the same in 2023.
Yes, and that’s great, it really is, but when the footage you have is portrait, don’t pad it out to force landscape orientation on it irrespective of the orientation of the viewer’s screen, just let portrait content be full size portrait when viewed on a portrait screen. That is the beginning, the middle and the end of my point. It’s all I’m asking for.
And when anyone films in portrait, make sure to punish anyone trying to watch the footage with a similarly criminal portrait orientation, by putting borders round the side of the portrait content to force it to be landscape, thus shrinking the content to roughly a ninth of their screen, unless they switch to the blessed landscape orientation when it will fill a glorious third of the screen. Let no one watch it full size for the creator thereof has sinned against the gods of landscape.
This is the right and proper punishment for content creators who break the landscape law: let no one see this video fullscreen, for they have sinned against landscape. ibb.co/x2MQQG2 let the borders of landscape wrath descend and pad, and let fullscreen be disabled for all, for if landscape viewers are denied fullscreen EVERYONE MUST SUFFER.
Oh, or you could just skip the fuzzy bars in portrait mode if you’re feeling more accommodating to phone users.
Alright, you win, I’ll never use my phone in portrait ever again, especially not to film my dog in a storm. I’ll make sure I turn that baby right to your preferred orientation and I’ll stop complaining about pointless bars at the side of other people’s portrait content.
If you want, I can go back through my canara roll and delete everything that’s in portrait just in case I’m ever tempted to sell it to a news organisation. I’ll make sure to only ever post landscape content to whatsapp, signal and especially tiktok and instagram, because otherwise some relative, friend or random Internet user might share it in portrait.
You’re right. That’s definitely a better solution than not putting annoying fuzzy bars on portrait content.
Yeah if you look at the pictures in the article, you can see the advertisement shows the patty being 20?% larger than the bun underneath it. The photo under that shows the actual patty being slightly (10?%) smaller than the bun. I assume that’s how the 35% number was determined.
Maybe they are diferent in your country. Back before covid i somtimes had to go there and ordered 2 or 3 doble whoopers and and i remember it being way too expensive. I left hungry and feeling riped off.
This happened to me in the USA. I told the doctor I want to be sterilized and neither my husband nor I wanted kids.
He told me it would be unethical. My husband might die and then my new husband would want children. I told him I would not change my mind, and such a man would be incompatible for marriage with me. He told me I’d change my mind. So basically, yes some hypothetical future man would want to use me for a baby factory, that’s why I can’t be sterilized.
I was 30. I’m older now, still don’t want them. I’m too ashamed to ask again for sterilization. My husband has a vasectomy scheduled soon (weird how a doctor had no problem doing that for him. Wonder what the difference is???)
I think the doctor thinks of your husband as a baby factory manager and as he wants the baby factory out of operation it is his choice. Now if he died a new manager could start up the factory again. I know this is extremely fucked up and there is no reason you should not be able to get sterilised but it is a fucked up world we live in.
Easier said than done, anyway. I was just shocked he said that. I’m sure if I wanted his statement in writing he would have written something like “I don’t recommend this for women who have not yet had children because there are plenty of other effective treatments like [etc]” and nobody would care.
Someone at my work was told something similar by a different doctor (in a different state!) that he wouldn’t sterilize her because she wasn’t married. She had 3 children already in her mid twenties.
Pushing back on this stuff is a battle that shouldn’t have to take place on the personal level. We’re going backwards in women’s healthcare in America, too.
As an American (and filthy microwaver of tea, though I do have a kettle now) I just stopped scrolling in the hopes of witnessing some rage at the idea, but everyone’s being really reasonable. My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined.
Dude, I've been experimenting with different mixes of ginger and cinnamon. People obsess about water temperatures. Tea drinkers like nothing but ideas for more posh things to do to their drinks. "Pinch of salt" is just snobby enough that I can't wait to try it and tell it to all my friends next time I'm complaining about a lackluster café order.
The big issue I see, and it's a PR thing, is it coming from the US. That alone may disqualify it. We'll have to see.
Yeah we’re not exactly known for our tea here, unless it’s in a harbor or so full of sugar it’s not even really tea anymore, so I can see it not going over that well. I just made a cup but it’s one of my favorite kinds and I’m too afraid to try the salt in case it ruins it.
I’m an American. I drink a lot of tea throughout the day. Different kinds for breakfast, midmorning, lunch and mid afternoon. I’ve never had a tea I thought would be improved with milk. I just don’t get it.
I don't even know what some people call "tea" in this context sometimes. It could be they're having Ceylon in the morning and Earl Gray in the afternoon, but sometimes what they mean is they're soaking some weeds in the morning and some dry fruits in the afternoon and calling it tea. I lived in a place for a while where all infusions are referred to with the word for "tea", so you'd ask for cup of tea, be given a camomile infusion and be expected not to murder your host.
“Improved” is the wrong word, in my opinion. It’s not that the tea is made better with the addition of milk, it’s just that it’s good in a different way. I drink my tea straight at work, no additions. But on a Saturday morning, with flapjacks and bacon, a lavender earl grey with a hint of sugar and a small splash of cream is just. Mmm. The cream can mute some of the stronger flavor profiles and allow some of the more subtle ones to shine. I love it both ways, neither is better than the other. They’re just different good.
Oh, yeah, I know. Brits will just throw a bag of the crappiest tea they have around in a teapot and move on with their day.
Which is a luxury you can afford when even middling supermarket tea is drinkable. Over where I am if you're doing tea you have an... affectation. Plus even if you don't want to, finding drinkable tea is hard enough that you end up going to the fancy stuff by default.
“Pinch of salt” is just snobby enough that I can’t wait to try it and tell it to all my friends next time I’m complaining about a lackluster café order.
See, this is why I love the internet, it allows me to find my kin. I relish in learning enough about a niche thing that I have enough discernment that I can be a bit of a snob, if I wish.
Hah. This is me respectfully nodding in your general direction.
Although I'll admit that in my case this mostly manifests as me buying literally any food I haven't eaten before and putting super gross stuff in my mouth, no matter how transparent of a marketing scheme it is. I bought that coke they asked ChatGPT to formulate. This is a real problem.
Also, if anybody is curious I put a pinch of salt in my tea today. It was fine, not noticeable. I'll try a bigger pinch next time.
Most Americans don’t get kettles with temp settings because we’re fucking plebs. Ask an American what they think a kettle is and 7 times out of 10 they’ll say it’s a busted, dented piece of metal with a strange flippy lid that their mom used to put on the stovetop for some reason.
I mean, I’m not. I have one with 6 different temps on it. Because tea is serious business. But most Americans, you know. 😂
I’ve read that water oxygenation is affected by microwaving water, so there is some difference to standard boiling. Whether this matters for tea or not is a different question, and I can’t find anything decisive on the matter.
They are pretty common in America, and have been for quite a while. Less so than in the UK (which is probably your point). But still pretty easy to find in my experience.
I got one about 20 years ago from Target - nothing too fancy, just an Oster or something. It finally died a couple of years ago and I got a new one from Amazon, where they had a very wide selection.
No disagreement. They’re available but less common than other heating methods. I feel like stovetop is probably the most common but microwave is certainly in there too.
Despite having his laptop confiscated, Kurtaj managed to breach Rockstar, the company behind GTA, using an Amazon Firestick, his hotel TV and a mobile phone.
This sounds all impressive, and MacGyver level. But I need more info. Did he just cast his phone screen to the TV so he could see better while he used ssh or ftp in to a poorly secured port at Rockstar or did he do some crazy shit.
Yeah, that is about what happened. According to the BBC, he had purchased a keyboard, mouse and Fire TV stick to “connect to cloud services”:
In a “flagrant disregard for his bail conditions”, jurors were told that police found an Amazon Fire Stick in his hotel TV allowing him to connect to cloud computing services with a newly purchased smart phone, keyboard and mouse.
Right, lol, so the fellow could have just connected to a free cloud VM running Kali and run some scripts, or more likely got access to Rockstar cloud services by social engineering a password out of someone. Riveting stuff, hah
Nothing happens for storing your gun in a dumb enough way that a 6 y.o. can get their hands on it and bring it to school…
Did you not read the article?
The mother of a six-year-old boy who shot his teacher in the US state of Virginia has been sentenced to 21 months in prison on a drug charge linked to the gun used in the attack.
Deja Taylor, 26, pleaded guilty in June to using cannabis while owning a firearm. She still faces sentencing on a state charge of felony child neglect.
She already pled guilty to felony child endangerment. I do not understand what you find significant about the fact that she has not yet been sentenced for that crime.
Even without any drug, alcohol or kid involved, leaving your loaded gun unattended in a handbag is wack.
This wasn’t even the first time her gun was fired in public through negligence, yet she’s still carrying one around.
It is illegal to have a firearm on your person while under the influence of alcohol, even one drink. Now as to how often that gets enforced is entirely another problem.
But it sounds as if the problem was that she owned cannabis, not currently being under the influence. Imagine having some beer in your fridge and not being able to own a gun. I might have misunderstood that part though.
bbc.co.uk
Top