They banned groups giving out candy as a celebration of the Hamas attacks and kidnappings of Israelis and groups that openly support terrorist organisations like Hamas. Are you opposed to that? How do you think Germany should react to a group that’s openly anti-semitic?
Except most governments. They also fund humanitarian aid for the Palestinians on the down-low but publically they’re supporting Israel. Just look at the US.
I live in the southern USA, evangelical folks in my area are fully onboard with Israel support. Facebook links constantly, sign boards in front of churches, those annoying free newspapers they publish and leave in the driveway.
It’s all anti Muslim and some really creepy genocide talk.
Well, in the defence of some evangelical communities, they're just out there hoping the rapture will happen in their lifetimes and doing what they can to speed up the process.
Some of them don't necessarily hate Muslims, they just want the world to end ASAP and believe supporting a militant Israel will speed up the process. And who knows, maybe they're right.
It’s just my opinion, but I think batshit crazy is worse. At least evil people have convictions. You may not like their reasons, but it’s consistent. Crazy people are unpredictable and act erratically. They legit scare me.
“You have this group of people looking around for signs of the end time, and in the 20th century when Israel was founded, this was seen as a major sign. This was electrifying for that community because the gathering of all the Jews in exile to the Holy Land is a prerequisite for all of these events unfolding”
Wtf? Even lemmy was crazy to read just a few days ago. Deranged comments everywhere in support of Israel. Plus a lot of governments support them directly as well.
I think it was mostly people calling out Hamas’ shit which was taken as being “deranged comments in support of Israel”. People act as though picking a side in this war is like picking a football team. There are shit heads on all sides.
Nah I would have found that very much Ok as I or course what Hamas did and does is completely inhumane.
It was basically a lot of different ways of saying that Palestinians deserved it because Hamas was voted in, not thrown out yet, or simply because they haven’t left. Just gross comments everywhere
Bruh where have you been, I’ve seen the most sanguine comments being catapulted to the top of feeds. Although not as bad in Lemmy as i saw it on reddit.
The same thing’s happening in Canada with the CBC; bunch of people calling them out for not saying “terrorist” implying it means they’re in favour of the attacks, when CBC simply has a policy of not saying that about anyone, because it’s not their job.
I just listened to a cbc segment that had a jew on saying to escalate, innocent civilians be damned. And yes, I hear JT call out Hamas as terrorists. We’re going to support a genocide if that’s what Isreal decides to do.
Best example comes to us via the BBC above, during WW2 they never called the Nazis wicked or evil, but they did not and did not need to have Nazi-apologists on air to present a “fair and balanced” view Fox-News style.
As long as you present opinion as opinion and reporting as reporting and refrain from loaded language in your reporting you’re perfectly fine. Could it be better? Yes. But while you might not have arrived at “morally good”, you have clearly left “morally bad”.
He will NOT be appointing officials for an organization that kills people until the government stops allowing abortions. Just let the logic sink in for a while. The guy’s a POS, and nobody should be surprised that a single issue candidate is only interested in a single issue.
Not to mention that because of the standing rules of the Senate, all you have to do is send an email saying you’re filibustering and any one person can bring to halt something all the other 99 Senators just want to move on to the next topic.
Literally this guy stands alone on this and the brain dead rules allow him and him alone to bring it all to a halt.
And the rules won't change because most of the Senate loves that someone else can halt things, take the heat, and then they won't have to deal with unpopular decisions.
Not in this case, but they're literally willing to force the military fuck over career professionals so that they can keep their cushy plausible deniability.
So many self-serving rules. And honestly, if we held any of them accountable to their campaign promises we might actually have a functioning congress. But here we are.
It funny/sad that allowing the Senate to function in the absence of a supermajority is seen as a desperate measure. Too me it seems like the only reasonable thing to do.
This is the real problem, and it’s infuriating. Not only because of the way it stops the Senate from doing so many things, but because so many people now believe it’s how the filibuster had always worked. And so people hate it.
But, in fact, the filibuster, in its original form, is a powerful tool the minority can use to make its voice heard and perhaps even effect change. It needs to come back - make Tuberville stand up and talk for hours on end for each of these appointees he opposes. Make McTurtle totter to center stage and wheeze for as long as he can the next time he wants to block a Democrat President’s Supreme Court Judge.
If Netflix’s reporting on the matter is to be believed, then it’s an ironic outcome considering the wave of strongly-opinionated comments predicting the death of Netflix following the crackdown on password sharing. I guess convenience and habits really trump principles and posturing.
Yeah, I have been wondering just how bad their content has gotten, or of I somehow got pigeonholed by their filtering algorithms. Somehow almost everything was rated two stars out of five and just plain bad, or in some random language that I don’t speak.
I’m really pissed off when the same movie keeps appearing in every section with different thumbnail. Yes I’ve been fooled by both the category and the different appearance but I don’t recall ever being tricked into watching something, only annoyed and frustrated
What I'm finding and what's really annoying, is that every streaming service out there has like 1 or 2 shows and a couple of movies I want to see. Someone will bring up a show, but oh sorry, it's on Crave. Or nope, that one's on Disney Plus. That other show? It's on Prime.
I recently canceled Netflix and moved to Crave, and I am certainly no happier. Thank God I barely care to watch TV as it is.
I told my family I was going to cancel when they cracked down on our households sharing and they haven’t yet. My parents are still enjoying it at their house, and me at mine.
I hated the crackdown but resisting on “principles” is bizarre to me. I left Reddit and Twitter due to principles. Netflix wanting to get paid for their service and content is reasonable. Wanting a business to serve you up free entertainment with no catch?
Also before anyone tries to claim hypocrisy - The difference between that and Twitter/Reddit is myself and the community create the content and are forcefed ads.
I don’t pay for Netflix and think their content mostly sucks but thinking “I deserve this service for free” is a childish perspective. Go ahead and pirate it, I couldn’t care less, but don’t act like it gives you the moral high ground lol
With this whole “you pay for a screen package, love is sharing a password” business they just dug a PR hole for themselves. If they’d had offered price X per screen from the start, then introduced a “same household discount” or whatever, we wouldn’t have all this outrage. But execs can only see as far as next quarter and here we are.
Netflix wanting to get paid for their service and content is reasonable.
Sure, it's reasonable, and why I started subscribing in the first place. But if I pay for four screens, I expect to be able to use all of those four screens, no matter what address they are being viewed from.
You’re not paying for that though. The terms of service have never allowed giving other people your details and letting people outside your household use your account.
Also you can still use 4 devices no matter where you are - mobile devices and tablets and laptops are not IP restricted.
Company decides to change the deal and terms of service to require nudes and accompanying driver’s licenses photos every 21 days in this wild hypothetical
Whirlybird: Why do people think they’re entitled to use a private company’s service nude-free while still paying? It’s in the ToS!
About a month ago we could not use the account on a smart TV in the rental home because it was away from the home network. Updating the home network wasn't an option because the family members not on the trip were still watching things at home.
Being able to watch on a phone, but not on a TV, is stupid.
You skipped the part where Netflix actually encouraged account sharing for a long time. Now they frame the account sharers as thieves. Also the other part where quality of content goes down while subscription prices go up while still not providing plans with hq streams for single people. Which all was tolerable for a few bucks a month. Without sharing netflix is simply not worth the money
Can you point to where they’re calling account sharers “thieves”? I’ve just seen them say they’re now limiting screens. And agreed the content sucks which is why I unsubscribed awhile ago. No one is forcing you to use it, but at the same time no one deserves it for free.
They’re not saying it directly of course, but they clearly frame the account sharers as “bad guys” now. I mean you’re correct that no one is entitled to watch netflix for free but that “poor netflix just wants to get paid” narrative is some serious BS. I also kinda doubt netflix tells us the 100% truth about subscription growth/recession. The only reason I did not switch my account on/off over the years was because it was shared and it would have required coordination with the other party.
I think I am more annoyed by their pricing plans following this move. They are double dipping by charging more for additional screens and then preventing users from using said additional screens. They shouldn't have tiered pricing plans by number of screens if they have no intention of honouring them.
They’re not preventing you from using more screens. If you want to watch Netflix while the kids watch Netflix in another room, that’s what the multiple device plans are for.
Unless I want to watch from my holiday home. Or if my kids want to watch Netflix at my ex's house. Or if I travel regularly. Or I want to regularly watch Netflix with my friend or girlfriend at their house. There are numerous reports of restrictions on all of these, so they clearly are limiting the number of screens I can use.
You get a one time use PW in all those other instances. I was actually thinking about creating a shared email address with only a Netflix account associated to it so my whole family could still use it without having to pester one another about the one time use code, but at that point piracy is just easier.
Just because they don’t share the same opinion as you doesn’t mean they’re stupid. Netflix is great for just sitting down and watching something random and discovering new shows and movies - especially foreign ones. It’s also priceless for kids shows for parents.
Stupidity is in the eye of the beholder. You can judge me as stupid in return for thinking that of these new subscribers if you want and then we‘ll both go our ways. Only one of us will pay Netflix no matter how much they enshittify their service or how much they raise their prices (since it‘s "priceless") and one won‘t. C‘est la vie.
I‘m already disappointed in people, this is barely making a dent, all that happened is the comment made me of think of a funny quote and then this other guy had to regale me with this "Netflix is priceless" crap, and now I get you heroes here advocating for the sorry ass corporation too. What a mistake of me to even be on social media at all, if it‘s just supposed to be a popular sentiment marketing circlejerk!
As I said, as a parent having a ready stream of endless Childrens content available at any time on any device in any place is priceless, and definitely worth the $20 a month or whatever it is you pay for it.
It was always going to lead to more subscribers because more people would lose access to Netflix so would subscribe themselves than would cancel their account because others couldn’t use their login.
The people that lost Netflix weren’t subscribers, and lots of them would have them subscribed. The subscribers had no reason to unsubscribe.
I was the subscriber and I unsubscribed because I alone wasn’t using it enough to justify the price. When I knew my sister and her family were watching too, it felt more like it was worth it.
This is a pretty big shift for the US, and it means the pressure is finally starting to really register with Biden. If the “uncommited” results in the Michigan primary were enough to get his attention, recent polling that puts him 8 points behind Trump likely changed the debate for the foreseeable future.
Biden is playing diplomatic chess. Netanyahu warned the US before the vote that Israel would not participate in a meeting if the US didn’t use its veto. So, now the US didn’t. BTW, Hamas launched rockets at Ashdod right before the Security Council voted confirming its status as an equal fighting party in the war before a ceasefire.
Certainly not, but he definitely cares about the 100,000 people that voted uncommitted in Michigan and the littany of polls that show a majority of Democratic and young voters not supporting current US foreign policy.
It’s not about people changing their minds. Centrists don’t really exist. It’s about motivating people to actually fucking vote. When people vote, Dems win. When Dems are unpopular, people don’t vote and Rs win because they vote no matter what.
If you can write out the math where I, voting 3rd party, add to Trump’s total, I will completely concede to your point and vote for the genocidal old man.
The uncommitted movement got 100K votes Michigan, and within days the Biden administration started a complete 180 on Israel. It’s more than a few Twitter users and he clearly cares very deeply.
Of course the sentence is relevant. I’m not sure why I should bother writing a reply to you when you apparently stop reading them after the first word. Have a good day.
It’s not selective reading. If I make a statement and you say “No” that mea s you’re refuting that statement.
Then their second sentence had nothing to do with wether they think these politics are simple or not, hence why I didn’t quit it.
The OP is just using bad faith arguments to distracts from that. Which is why they don’t even attempt to deny it and just criticise the fact I didn’t quote their entire comment instead of responding.
No, you didn’t read it properly, and I’d say you’re arguing in bad faith or you just cannot read properly as everyone else seems to have done just fine. Ignoring so much of their comment then their intention afterwards makes you look silly. You are wrong, your understanding is wrong.
Then why can’t the OP nor you/ anyone else actually give an explanation, or even so much as give a response to an INCREDIBLY simple question. Of “do you think international diplomacy is that simple?”
Again. The conversation went
Me: diplomacy isn’t that simple
SB: No. Shouting genocide Joe worked.
The first sentence is them denying my point that diplomacy isn’t simple. The second sentence is tangential to that point. And does nothing to explain why they think diplomacy isn’t actually simple. He’ll I’m not even denying their se and point. Shouting genocide Joe did put pressure on Biden that did shape foreign policy in some small way. But again, its not relevant to the point I was making, so didn’t quote it.
Which is why the other commenter is acting in bad faith when they completely ignore my point because I didn’t quote their tangential point in my second comment.
I thought this would be fairly obvious to anyone with literacy skills but apparently I need to wrote whole paragraphs to explain what someone replying “no” means.
The best time to abstain would have been decades ago, but the second-best time is now. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good; this was a good choice.
Edit: The downvotes are hard to interpret. Do people think the US abstaining (and thus allowing the resolution to pass) was not a good choice?
To be absolutely clear for those who for some reason still aren't understanding it at this point, choosing to abstain from voting on this resolution was the same as voting to support it. The US could have blocked this resolution and instead decided "no, we'll let this one through." Given that they could have blocked it but made a conscious decision not to block it, knowing that by not blocking it the resolution would pass, that was a decision in favor of this resolution.
Do you understand the political mess involved in the ties between USA and Israel? There’s multiple factions whose support is conditional on WH supporting Israel. Biden isn’t just negotiating with Netanyahu, he’s negotiating with the rest of his own party and donors. He wouldn’t be able to vote for in UN without consequences, like political factions and donors moving to R instead.
They ARE wrong though. They’re acting like we’re only getting mad about one thing at a time. What kind of smug asshole goes on the internet to peddle moral superiority over strawmen?
It’s moreso that the emphasis on issues is very often skewed by MSM to the stuff that matters a lot less, and then the normies all get in an outrage. Does it really matter if BK is still in Russia? They’re not actively working with the Russian military right? The money is flowing out to the glorious USA BK hq no?
i started to read the article and thought ‘these are dumb alarmist charges, boys can’t even have hobbies anymore’, and i read this
The plane crashed into the Los Padres National Forest 35 minutes after take-off. Jacob hiked to the site and recovered the footage. He then uploaded the video entitled “I crashed my airplane” to YouTube on 23 December, which contained a promotion for a wallet company, prosecutors said.
he delayed the research of the site by providing wrong information (while he knew perfectly where the crashed plane was… because he walk to it to get the videos footage)
payed an helicopter to extract the plane scrape to a secret location (while ntsb was still looking for the crash site)
then destroyed the evidence, so the ntsb could not perform any checks
i could add also that he had a fire extinguisher hide in his pant (to be able to access the footage if the plane was still on fire i presume), the original motor was may be replaced before the crash, the plane door was not properly lock (to facilitate his jump)… ha and yes, he had a jumpsuit (no fitting a normal pilot activity)…
Well, all of that was badly done. He’s a piece of shit that should never flight again.
And in addition to all of that. That plane was more than capable of doing an engine out landing in areas you can see in his video. But within seconds of issues he desides to pull back on the stick (to stop the prop for drama) and decides to jump out. He does no troubleshooting or looking for an appropriate landing site even though several good locations can be seen.
Even if you had to crash land, that plane can go slow enough that it's a better option than jumping out. Skydiving into the wilderness isn't a great idea.
It’s been proven over and over remote work retains top talent and makes people better at their work. And the “productivity loss” is covered by the fact that people maybe get less done in eight hours, but work longer to make up for the productivity they lost to taking more breaks.
But American capitalism has to remind the workers that their misery is part of the point.
Plus there's a multitude of studies showing that people work far less than 8 hours a day, even if they are physically present at the job. I doubt productivity actually drops at all.
I worked in a government office that supported a very seasonal industry.
My coworker had an 8:30 start and would be done her work by 9.
Other times we wouldn't have time in the day to finish, but the slow season was hell.
My kids are less distracting than the folks who walk into my office to chat while I’m in a working session. “Are you in a meeting? Yes? Oh well, You should have seen…”
Especially with the expansion of the open office… Ugh. I’ve avoided it for most of my career and I hope to never go back to an official office unless it has a door on it.
Same. Guy that sits behind me in the office has an average speaking volume of 78 decibels. Yes, I pulled out a sound meter one day because he is so goddamn loud. And I’m stuck in an open floor plan with him.
The productivity loss takes place at the office. You go from being able to solve problems all day to having Susie Homemaker and Joe Blob wanting to talk to you about the sportsball event when you’re in the middle of super complicated logic. You go from being able to use the restroom 30 seconds from your desk to walking 10 minutes to get to the closest one at the office. You go from making a quick sandwich and then getting back to work, to driving miles away to find something decent to eat. Every engineer I know is more productive at home.
More likely, they’ve reached critical mass and are now using this as a downsizing move. They know a % will quit. Will reduce the number they have to float until eventual layoffs.
Aren't they risking losing their most talented workers doing that? I assume they can more easily find jobs providing the flexibility they're looking for.
I work in tech, at one of the big tech companies (the Rainforest one).
The dirty little secret of tech is that you don’t need the best engineers. You just need people that are “good enough”, and that bar varies wildly across all of tech. I’ve worked with senior engineers from Google that absolutely crumbled outside of building Python web apps, and recent grads in LCOL areas that are better in all areas.
Alongside this, many tier 1 services in big tech are propped up by mid-level engineers. Depending on the company and org, you’d be shocked at how little coding some software engineers actually do, because they’re attending WBR’s, building review decks, running all scrum ceremonies, even responsible for multimillion dollar team budgets. Again, many of these people aren’t particularly talented compared to your standard engineer.
You’re absolutely right, but I doubt any big tech company cares. They want to reduce human cost as much as possible, and if that means letting everyone that knows how shit works go, and hiring new grads to keep your systems alive, so be it.
This only works for so long, then the company hires an MSP which does have top notch engineers and they run it like that for a decade before bringing it back in house. The cycle has always been like this. They did it in 08-11 when a ton of companies laid off their devs and shipped the jobs to code farms in India…then half a decade later when the code was like a house of cards, rehired top talent back in house to fix it all. The cycle will continue, it’s just the way CEOs who aren’t there long term for the company think. Short term profits, aka kick the can down the road to the next guy.
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a fucking stupid approach, as do ~90% of IC’s at these companies.
Someone at Amazon put it nicely when they’ve said that there’s a rise in “belief-driven” leadership in tech right now. Instead of following the data and asking people what they want, we’re seeing tech leaders position themselves as visionaries, and making market-changing decisions on gut feeling. It’s absolutely a series a short-term decisions, and all they care about is what they think, and how it’ll save their skin for the next 3-6 months.
Oh man thank you for that phrase. “belief driven leadership” is exactly what’s happening there right now. Spot on. I’m so close to finding somewhere else to work but my immediate leadership thinks the RTO is bullshit as well. However I know they can’t hold off forever.
I’ve worked most of my career with msps and yes there are a lot of the lower level guys which are more for triage than fixing anything and they’re average, but the higher levels all have top notch engineers usually. Don’t get me wrong, there will always be those who squeezed by and made it higher but most who are higher up the food chain have a lot of experience from tons of different environments.
That’s very shortsighted though. One great engineer is worth 10 mediocre engineers, especially when you factor in the time required to manage them. But I’ve never built a trillion dollar company before, so I’m probably not qualified to say that my ideas are better.
The American had touted his sit-down with Putin as a triumph for free speech, asserting that he was heading where no Western news outlets dared to tread.
its amazing that carlson points out his own purpose here is not 'news'.
Amusingly, even the russian government corrected him on that too - to paraphrase, “we have lots of requests to interview Putin, he just doesn’t want to do it”
The even more amazing part is that the Kremlin debunked him. They said they constantly get interview requests from journalists. They just never accept them.
They outrage is such a great example of western exceptionalism. The existence of western consumer businesses in the countries of the non-Aryan jungle is supposed to be an immense benefit to these places and their departure must necessarily be disastrous for them. Nowhere is the idea entertained that Russians are perfectly capable of creating their own shitty burger restaurants to replace those if the west.
You're missing the point. For BK to operate in Russia means dollars flowing into Russia, because BK needs to buy Rubles. Dollars that Russia needs to buy arms on the international market, because nobody is accepting Rubles.
This is true. However, if I owned BK, I’d see this as an amazing business strategy, although a quite unethical one (but as we can see, multi million+ dollar companies aren’t the most ethical either way). I mean, now the literal government has an interest for it to stay in business, they may even start to promote the brand.
Except BK is an American company. They wouldn’t operate in Russia if they weren’t making a profit. So their net effect is to have money flowing out of Russia.
It’s like that 80s news footage of the first McDonald’s opening in Moscow where they’re like so-true ”finally those filthy commies get to enjoy our superior Western treats”
Then they interview someone who says it wasn’t really worth it to stand in line and pay so much lenin-laugh
Man your historical revisionism is almost endless at hexbear.
I grew up in a navy/embassy family, so moved around every 3-5 years onto new postings. At an embassy posting in Stockholm, it was common for the attaché-community to pair newly arrived families with someone who had been there for a while. My mum thus got paired with a newly arrived Soviet wife-of-an-attaché to show her the ropes of diplomat life. This lady was on her first posting (it was quite common for Soviet embassy staff to have a LOT of newcomers for fear that they would get to used to western life style and seek asylum) and she was showing this lady where to do shopping in Stockholm. I was joining as I was too small to be left at home on my own.
So we walk into this supermarket and the Soviet lady sort of walks in, stops for a second, then walks through the one-way gates and stops again. And then she bursts into tears.
Diplomat life is hard on partners - so tears in the opening days aren’t that uncommon. My mum pulls her to the side and starts saying the usual (“I remember when we started”, “it’ll get better” bla bla) and the Soviet lady says basically “you don’t understand! I’ve never, ever seen so much choice and food and my life”.
She wasn’t crying because she had left home. She was crying because she was realising how fucked up home was - and remember this is someone who was sent out as a diplomat so reasonably well connected at home.
The West had a reason for its exceptionalism back then. Compared to many places it still does. In others, of course, we need to wake the fuck up - China is a great example, where there is definitely no cause for a feeling of exceptionalism. Russia, oh boy, yes we can still feel exceptional.
Go on then, dismiss me with your hexbear memes and be gone.
if it was so bad why did the CIA report that the average russians diet was better than compartively an americans?
‘I get to have 8 different brands of pepsi-cola im so free’ isnt a compelling arguement lmao, neither are annecdotes from your neo-liberal scum family.
listen up kid my dad worked in a european embasy and he said the people we bombed where poor so think again COMMIE about how many freeDOMS we have as a result of our rape of the third world
What sort of nonsense response is that? Anyone can poop out any anecdote they like to support their position and say “I know it hurts so it’s easy to reject”.
Give me a break. No system is perfect and the discussion isn’t about perfection vs horror. It’s about a series of tradeoffs and the tradeoffs done in the west broadly resulting in better outcomes, on average, for the population there than they did in the Soviet Union. For China nowadays, I’m less certain. Definitely in the big Tier 1 cities, life is on par with Western outcomes, for some better for some worse.
I’m just saying, it’s ironic to use that example of a diplomat as opposed to how many people live paycheck to paycheck barely able to make ends meet or are actually homeless, I doubt those people are crying in joy when they walk into a Walmart
I think you’ve missed my point entirely - that could be my fault.
The example illustrates that even for those well-connected enough in the Soviet Union the sight of a western supermarket was enough to make them weep (this was ‘88).
I brought this example up to address the false belief that people in Russia weren’t all that impressed with western products (like McDonalds) back when the Soviet Union existed.
I don’t know how you’re managing to connect that with how people live today and their experience of walking into Walmart.
Finally, this didn’t take place in Harrods but in ICA in Sweden. Hardly a luxury shop - just an average supermarket.
The idea of communism (extremely simplified) everyone has the means to live and people at “the top” don’t get special privilege on that, obviously almost all actual implementations turn into dictatorships so the point is somewhat moot, however the fact a well connected diplomat in a communist country had to live in the same conditions as other non-well connected people would be a positive, not a negative, they’d see and hopefully be able to improve the lives of everyone as they understand what it’s like.
Compare that to a majority of the rich and powerful in America, they’re so ridiculously disconnected from the average experience that they literally do not understand at all what it’s like for those with less.
Ah, with that I broadly agree. But I do feel the goalposts are shifting.
In the case of “was it right for the west to feel their system was better than the Soviet one” my example simply illustrates that a western supermarket in ‘88 reduced someone from the Soviet Union to tears.
But that’s really misdirecting of the overall issue right? That’s why I brought up homeless or very low income people in America as a counter-example.
Sure capitalism brings us some good things because of the profit incentive driving some to continue pushing the envelope (there’s pros and cons, don’t want to get too in the weeds) but there’s also massive inequality, compared to the ideal of a communist or socialist perspective where sure it might not be as shiny or you don’t have as many options, but you’re definitely housed and fed.
I agree but I wasn’t trying to address the overall issue. Certainly no more me than the people I responded to, who used the example of shitty junk food joints to claim the people of the Soviet Union didn’t look with envy on the choices offered to the western citizens.
In theory the communist system is fantastic, in the same way the society described in The Culture is. There just hasn’t been any implementation that got close to that ideal and certainly the median citizen seems better off in the west.
I guess the main thing they might have been talking about is how a lot of the “west culture” will only trumpet the “good” aspects of capitalism and downplay any/all negatives.
Like it’s cool we have McDonalds and many other fast food places available, but so many of them are bottom of the barrel quality/health wise and therefore it’s really not like it adds a ton of value to our lives over if we didn’t have to worry about having healthy food provided to us, even if we don’t have the choice.
Mostly splitting hairs at this point, I think we broadly agree :p
Better outcome is when everyone is homeless and dies from preventable diseases due to unaccessible healthcare, BUT they have a choice of 50 different shampoos.
And the horror is when everyone has a roof, is educated, in good health, but has to munch on the disgusting government provided nutritious food. 😡
On October 29, 2017, actor Anthony Rapp alleged that Spacey, while appearing intoxicated, made a sexual advance toward him at a party in 1986, when Rapp was 14 and Spacey was 26.[118][119] Rapp had also shared this story in a 2001 interview with The Advocate, but Spacey’s name was redacted from publication to avoid legal disputes and public outing.[120] Spacey stated through Twitter that he did not remember the encounter, but that he owed Rapp “the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior” if he had behaved as asserted.[121][122] On September 9, 2020, Rapp sued Spacey for sexual assault, sexual battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress under the Child Victims Act.[123]
Fifteen others then came forward alleging similar abuse,[124] including Boston anchorwoman Heather Unruh, who alleged that Spacey sexually assaulted her son;[125][126] filmmaker Tony Montana; actor Roberto Cavazos;[127] Richard Dreyfuss’s son Harry;[128] and eight people who worked on House of Cards.[129] The Guardian was contacted by “a number of people” who alleged that Spacey “groped and behaved in an inappropriate way with young men” as artistic director of the Old Vic.[130][131][132]
Spacey also appears on flight logs from Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet from the early 2000s.[133]
Coming Out ControversyOn the same day as Rapp’s allegations against him, Spacey came out as gay when apologizing to Rapp. He said, “I have had relationships with both men and women. I have loved and had romantic encounters with men throughout my life, and I choose now to live as a gay man.”[134][135] His decision to come out via his statement was criticized by gay celebrities, including Billy Eichner, George Takei, Lance Bass, and Wanda Sykes, as an attempt to change the subject and shift focus from Rapp’s accusation, for using his own drunkenness as an excuse for making a sexual advance on a minor, and for implying a connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse.[136][137][138]
Some readers additionally felt that by claiming he was “horrified” by Rapp’s story, Spacey was attempting to paint himself as the victim of the alleged abuse.[139] In October 2022, Spacey expressed regret over the way he came out and said that it was “never [his] intention” to deflect from the allegations against him or conflate them with his sexual orientation.[140][141]
Reaction and ramificationsAmid the allegations, filming was suspended on the sixth and final season of House of Cards. The show’s production company had implemented “an anonymous complaint hotline, crisis counselors, and sexual harassment legal advisors for the crew”, and stated that in 2012, “someone on the crew shared a complaint about a specific remark and gesture made by Kevin Spacey. Immediate action was taken following our review of the situation and we are confident the issue was resolved promptly to the satisfaction of all involved.”[142] According to the production company, Spacey “willingly participated in a training process and since that time MRC has not been made aware of any other complaints” involving him.[143] The show had been due to end in 2018.[125] The season was shortened from 13 episodes to eight, and Spacey was removed from the cast and from his role as executive producer.[144]
The Gore Vidal biographical film Gore, starring Spacey, which was set to be distributed by Netflix, was canceled,[145][146] and Netflix went on to sever all ties with him.[147] He was due to appear in All the Money in the World as industrialist J. Paul Getty; his scenes were cut and Christopher Plummer replaced him as Getty in reshoots.[67] In an interview with Variety, Plummer said, “It’s really not replacing [Spacey]. It’s starting all over again.” Plummer elaborated saying, “I think it’s very sad what happened to him… Kevin is such a talented and a terrifically gifted actor, and it’s so sad. It’s such a shame. That’s all I can say, because that’s it.”[148]
The International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences reversed its decision to honor Spacey with the 2017 International Emmy Founders Award.[149] On November 2, 2017, Variety reported that his publicist Staci Wolfe and talent agency Creative Artists Agency were ending their relationships with him.
Legal issuesThe Los Angeles District Attorney’s office stated in April 2018 that it would investigate an allegation that Spacey had sexually assaulted an adult male in 1992.[158][159] In July 2018, three more allegations of sexual assault against Spacey were revealed by Scotland Yard, bringing the total number of open investigations in the UK to six.[160] In September 2018, a lawsuit filed at Los Angeles Superior Court claimed that Spacey sexually assaulted an unnamed masseur at a house in Malibu, California, in October 2016.[161]
In December 2018, Spacey was charged with a felony for allegedly sexually assaulting journalist Heather Unruh’s 18-year-old son in Nantucket, Massachusetts, in July 2016.[162] Spacey pleaded not guilty to the charge on January 7, 2019.[163][164] Unruh’s son told police he was texting with his girlfriend throughout the alleged “groping” incident. Spacey’s defense attorneys spent months trying to obtain copies of the texts and the phone itself. In mid-May 2019, Unruh’s son’s personal attorney informed the court that the cell phone in question is “missing”.[165] On June 4, 2019, the defense learned that when Unruh gave her son’s cell phone to police in 2017, she admitted she had deleted some of the text messages.[165] Later that month, her son filed a lawsuit against Spacey, claiming emotional damages. On July 5, 2019, he voluntarily dismissed the claims with prejudice.[166]
On July 17, 2019, the criminal assault charge against Spacey was dropped by the Cape and Islands prosecutors.[167] When the anonymous massage therapist who accused him died, the last remaining criminal case against Spacey was closed.[168]
On September 9, 2020, Anthony Rapp accused Spacey in a complaint about actions that allegedly happened in 1986 (sexual assault and sexual battery) and intentional infliction of emotional distress under the Child Victims Act, which extended New York’s statute of limitations for suits related to child sexual abuse.[123] Joining Rapp in the suit against Spacey was a man who requested to remain anonymous who accused Spacey of sexually abusing him in 1983, when he was 14 and Spacey was 24.[169][170] On June 17, 2021, the anonymous accuser was dismissed from the case due to his refusal to publicly identify himself.[171] As Rapp’s trial lawsuit against Spacey commenced in October 2022, it was revealed that he had given an inaccurate description of the apartment where he alleged the abuse took place.[172][173] On October 17, the judge dismissed the emotional distress charges due to them being a “duplicate” of the battery charges.[14] On October 20, a jury found Spacey not liable.[174][175]
In 2020, Spacey and his production companies M. Profitt Productions and Trigger Street Productions were ordered to pay $31 million to MRC, the studio that produced House of Cards, for violating its sexual harassment policy.[176] Spacey appealed to have the arbitration award overturned, but the request was denied on August 4, 2022.[177]
On May 26, 2022, Spacey was charged by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in the United Kingdom with four counts of sexual assault against three complainants. The alleged offenses occurred between 2005 and 2013 in London and Gloucestershire.[178][179] According to the Crown Prosecution Service, it would only be possible to formally charge Spacey if he entered England or Wales. If Spacey refused to do so voluntarily an extradition process would have been necessary.[180] Nevertheless, in a statement to Good Morning America on May 31, 2022, Spacey said that he would “voluntarily appear in the U.K. as soon as can be arranged”.[181]
In his first British court appearance on June 16, Spacey denied the allegations against him.[182] On July 14, 2022, Spacey pleaded not guilty to the charges in London. [183][184] On November 16, 2022, the CPS authorized an additional seven charges against Spacey, all related to a single complainant arising from incidents alleged to have occurred between 2001 and 2004.[185][186] Three charges were dismissed before or during the trial which began on June 28, 2023, and on July 26, 2023, a jury found Spacey not guilty of the remaining nine charges.
Frankly I wish more court details were in the articles about this. There are a lot of accusers and info on the wiki, I can’t help but feel if he was accused of assaulting women this would have gone differently
Yeah, we need to see more details. The allegations against him were serious. This was a spot copy so is understandably sparse on details. I guess we will see more in depth stories being published by tomorrow.
bbc.co.uk
Top