Marvel’s visual effects employees have voted in favor of joining a union in their fight for better pay, overtime compensation, more benefits and better treatment.
According to Vulture, a supermajority of the company’s 50 on-set VFX employees have filed a petition for an election with the National Labor Relations Board.
They’re hoping to join the Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), which also represents hair and makeup artists, wardrobe, lighting and prop personnel, among other workers.
Because apparently, despite Marvel’s reliance on visual effects to make its universe(s), superheroes and supervillains look real on the big screen, its VFX artists aren’t represented by a union.
Several current and former VFX employees for the company previously spoke out about grueling schedules and breaking down under pressure while working on shows and movies for the studio.
Visual effects must become a sustainable and safe department for everyone who’s suffered far too long and for all newcomers who need to know they won’t be exploited."
I’m not a big Apple person, so I’ve not really cared about Airtags, so I’m probably missing something. If I don’t allow them to connect to my device, how are they a concern?
Edit: I realized I asked my question poorly. I get they’re a tracking device. My understanding is they’re a Bluetooth device that do not have direct Internet access on their own; how is their location being updated if you’re not pairing with them to allow them access to your device?
if I want to follow you home, I buy an airtag, drop it in your purse/truck bed/gym bag, wait for 45m and then go to where the airtag is.
That’s why it’s referring to anti stalking protections; the devices work too well, and allow you to track all sorts of things, even stuff that doesn’t belong to you, or that has the agency to not want you to.
Somebody with an iphone puts an airtag in your bag/car/etc and track you. Airtag is that usable because it can be located by other people’s iphones (and you will be reported), otherwise it would be mostly useless.
If someone sticks one to your car, they can track everywhere you go and you’d never realize it. The big thing with AirTags is that they aren’t just local tracking. They have access to the entire FindMy network, which is comprised of every single iOS device. So any time you drive past an iPhone, the AirTag is able to report in with your latest location.
With an iOS device, you’ll get an automatic alert if you’re being followed by an unfamiliar tag that hasn’t connected to its paired device in a while. So like if you’re with a friend, you won’t get alerts for their AirTag because the tag is near your friend’s paired phone. But if that friend drops their AirTag into your bag and you go home, you’ll get an alert that you’re being followed by an AirTag.
My understanding is they’re a Bluetooth device that do not have direct Internet access on their own; how is their location being updated if you’re not pairing with them to allow them access to your device?
Apple allows them to connect to any device in the “Find My” network and phone home, regardless of who it belongs to. Presumably that includes you driving next to someone with an iPhone if the tag is in your car. It’s supposed to also alert you f it’s determined to be travelling with you and the owner is not nearby, but I think that requires you to also have an Apple device, or install and actively use Apple’s Tracker Detect app for Android.
Ah, so very similar to what Amazon did with Sidewalk a few years back. I shocked people are ok with allowing this data through their devices. Sidewalk caused a massive backlash because of privacy and data rate concerns.
it’s a bit different, in that they’re just constantly broadcasting a singular id, over and over. The “tracking” is the application on various devices which receive the broadcast and report it to Apple, along with that device’s location.
Sidewalk was packing up actual user data and running it over your network, which has other implications.
The company’s unknown tracker alerts and other safety measures, announced at Google I/O in May, should start appearing on Android 6.0+ devices beginning today.
If your Android phone notifies you about a discovered tracking accessory, you can tap on the alert to learn more about it, including a map of where it traveled with you and (in some cases) a serial number and info about the device’s owner.
Once your phone receives the update, navigate to Settings > Safety & Emergency > Unknown Tracker Alerts, and select the “Scan now” button.
Google says the manual search only takes about ten seconds, and if it finds one, you’ll see the same options as if you received an automatic alert.
Google decided to wait for Apple to implement its full unknown tracking protections into iOS before rolling out the new feature.
Note that Google’s anti-stalking measures may reduce the effectiveness of following tracked stolen items on a map since enterprising thieves can soon quickly discover hidden trackers, no matter which phone they use.
Note that Google’s anti-stalking measures may reduce the effectiveness of following tracked stolen items on a map since enterprising thieves can soon quickly discover hidden trackers, no matter which phone they use.
They can’t get the tag off my bike without specific tools, so if they’re warned that the bike they stole is tracking them and it leads to them abandoning the bike somewhere, all the better for me.
I like Star Trek and I like musicals, but I don’t want the two to mix. I audibly groaned when I saw the description of this in Paramount+, and it seems like a thing where the cast wanted to do it regardless of whether it genuinely makes sense in the context of the show. All I thought was, “Yes, this seems like the kind of thing I would expect in Alex Kurtzman’s Star Trek.”
Maybe they thought they needed a lighter episode to follow “Under the Cloak of War.”
I haven’t watched it yet, though. I’ll follow up after I do.
OK, I watched it. I really enjoyed it as a musical, but as expected, it didn’t feel like Star Trek—especially when the Klingons showed up at the end and it basically became a parody. I think I could have bought it more as something like Q influence, but they couldn’t do that yet.
Aside from that, La’an’s actress has a set of pipes on her, wow. She could be a professional singer. There’s plenty of talent all around, though.
Buffy did it first, and that episode had way better lyrics and “character voices” in the writing, but there was no comparison on vocals. Buffy just had better characters in the first place, and more history when it got to its musical episode (it was during the show’s sixth season).
I don’t like musicals, at all, and I wasn’t looking forward to this. I wouldn’t say I think it’s a good episode … but I enjoyed it all the way through, except that I think the music got a bit boring in the second half.
On the klingon moment, they apparently had two versions, and the other was more operatic and in keeping with what some of us might have been expecting or hoping for. Hopefully it comes out at some point. The version we got, while stupid/silly, had me laughing pretty hard.
Actors for La’an, Uhura and Number One can all sing. Actor for Uhura is from broadway and has a Grammy, and actor for La’an started off in musical theatre.
Generally this season has kinda been about messing around with what star trek can be while trying to stay true to its spirit, much like lower decks. Saying it’s more “Kurtzman Trek” is unfair I think, because it’s a totally different vibe (personally I suspect Kurtzman doesn’t have as much control over this show as he did Discovery, probably for obvious reasons)
You’re right that Kurtzman has less creative control than he did on Discovery (where he was sole showrunner for a time), so it was a bit unfair. Introducing Pike and the Enterprise appears to be Akiva Goldsman’s idea from the outset in Discovery, and it seems that he and Kurtzman were the main co-creators of the series. Goldsman is evidently the main showrunner.
Nevertheless, Kyrtzman created this iteration of the universe with Discovery, and my issue with it is that a show like TOS or TNG would never be made in this universe. Picard is the clearest example of this, where it didn’t even feel like TNG in any way until season 3 when it got a new showrunner after going completely off the rails. I enjoyed that immensely, but it still felt like an extended TNG movie layered on the best TOS movies. The movies for both crews felt very different from their respective series.
Likewise, SNW is not TOS despite the trappings, although it’s less egregiously different than the first two seasons of Picard. It turned down the dial of the incessantly quippy dialogue of Discovery at least.
You’re right that they’re trying to bend what Star Trek is, and I’m fine with that to a point, but my perception is they feel like there’s something wrong with Star Trek that they need to fix: it’s too staid, too boring, not enough punchy dialogue, not enough emotion, whatever.
That said, I like more episodes of this than I do of the other recent shows. I just wish they had shelved this script in favor of one with a big idea, or barring that at least went with the operatic Klingon version instead…
I had to think of Buffy too. Maybe it was too early for a musical, but I enjoyed it nevertheless. Especially that Spock was the first to sing. And in the last song he was the first to act normal which was very Spock-like. I think the characters came through in the songs.
There should be a way to register it to property somehow. Might not be feasible for bikes and such but cars generally have Bluetooth or some sort of connection
The trio claims their cars fell well short of their estimated ranges
Teslas are tested to the EPA test cycles, same as every other car in the US. They’ve been audited multiple times, and always passed.
The lawsuit follows a Reuters report that Tesla began modifying EV ranges about a decade ago.
Ah yes, an unverified report from a single unnamed source with 10-year-old knowledge.
Its cars would supposedly show inflated figures when fully charged, and would only start showing accurate numbers under a 50 percent charge. … It’s not certain that Tesla still uses these purported exaggerations.
If the “investigative” reporter wanted to test this, they could literally just go and find a new Tesla and see what its fully-charged range says. Trivially simple. But it would show the EPA range which goes against their story, so they don’t mention it.
To head off complaints, the automaker is said to have created a “Diversion Team” that would persuade users to drop range-related support calls.
In tech (and Tesla is a tech company) it’s called L1 support. Try calling your ISP and getting them to send out a technician, and they’re going to make you do a bunch of other tests on your end first. It’s annoying, but it turns out most complaints can be solved over the phone (because most complaints come from people who are terrible with technology).
Tesla is the only company with such incorrect range estimates. There is now tons of evidence, such as internal communication, indicating that this was intentional lying. If they win, the payout will be to all affected, not just to those filing suit.
He’s right about the range calculation on the sticker though. It’s governed through SAE J1634, IIRC. The difference between EU and US is which test cycle they use, IIRC.
I’m not familiar with older J1634 so I’m not sure if it’s significantly different or not.
The other thing is, how is the end of test criterion determined for Tesla? The way the document is written leaves manufacturers with some wiggle room (IIRC). It could really be that the SAE paper should be revised to run with everything on.
The real time driving range is pretty damning though. I’m not sure if there’s any RDE testing required for BEV in the states. It would be really interesting to see if this sparks that.
It’s not right though. Tesla was uniquely inaccurate. This Ars Technica article I read a few days ago goes into more detail. No other manufacturer has such inaccurate range estimates. In fact, most exceed their estimates.
Certain manufacturers may have standard operating practices of keeping the AC running, or how close to the trace line they drive — there is a tolerance for some error.
If Tesla STICKER ranges are unrealistic, they are likely abusing the general EPA phrasing of “using good engineering judgment” that usually accompanies emissions legislation to push their ranges higher.
The other part of the ars technica concerns the actual estimates when driving the car. Above 50%, they are not providing accurate estimates.
Given recent events at the company formerly known as Twitter, though, do you really expect different from Musk?
Yes exactly. One could do mental gymnastics to try to defend this, but the balance of evidence and past decisions by Musk makes it obvious that this is far from innocent. This is theft by misrepresentation.
All I’m saying is that unless Tesla is advised by a certification witness to change their test method, they are unlikely to do so and it will be hard to argue that their sticker ranges aren’t lawful.
The software case on the other hand is misleading at best. I would characterize that as fraud, but I’m not a lawyer
I’m not a lawyer either, so your guess is as good as mine. From where I’m sitting, it seems to me that there is ample evidence, including internal communication and the activities of the “diversion” team, that this was NOT an engineering decision. When the problem was revealed, there was no attempt to correct it. I personally don’t see how this is so hard to argue when it is so blatant.
Pretty sure we were having a discussion about technology here in the /c/technology community. If you’d rather obsess over the CEO of the company, I’m sure there are plenty of other communities for dedicated fans such as yourself.
Let’s also not forget that this issue applied to ICE vehicles as well for decades. The EPA city/highway MPG ratings were always way higher on paper than in practice until they reformulated their testing several years back to give more accurate numbers.
EPA periodically updates its methodology to account for changes in vehicle technologies, driver behavior, and/or driving conditions. The 2008 changes were broad revisions to the entire methodology that lowered the fuel economy estimates for all vehicles. The updates for 2017 will reduce some fuel economy estimates by 1 mile per gallon (MPG) and a small number by 2 MPG.
A class action always starts with a handful of plaintiffs. It must be established first that there is grounds for a class action. In other words, you have to demonstrate that this is part of a larger problem. The first step is that small group of people. They file suit, and then it’s decided if the case should have class action status. Once the case is given class action status, all people that may have been effected are notified that they may qualify for the class action. In other words, literally 3 people in California are how a class action lawsuit gets started. If you knew anything about the legal process, you would know this.
Teslas are tested to the EPA test cycles, same as every other car in the US. They’ve been audited multiple times, and always passed.
Volkswagen vehicles were tested too. Turns out they had special programming to determine when they were being tested rather than normally driven.
Ah yes, an unverified report from a single unnamed source with 10-year-old knowledge.
All “sources” are unnamed. Welcome to journalism 101. If they’re named, they’re not “a source.” You just credit them. www.reuters.com/…/tesla-batteries-range/ Fucking Deepthroat was a “source” and he took down Nixon. It wasn’t until decades later that his actual identity was revealed. When a “source” is coming from someplace like Reuters you assume they’re legit until shown otherwise.
Also, learn to read. The actual statement is that Tesla STARTED modifying these numbers about ten years ago, not that their information is ten years old.
If the “investigative” reporter wanted to test this, they could literally just go and find a new Tesla and see what its fully-charged range says. Trivially simple. But it would show the EPA range which goes against their story, so they don’t mention it.
What part of “still uses” do you not understand? Tesla can modify the software of the car on the fly. Were you not aware of that? All they have to do is send an update to change these things. Can’t prove it? Well buddy, that’s what a lawsuit is for. Now the onus is on Tesla to prove that they aren’t doing illegal shit.
I don’t know why you have “investigative” in scare quotes other than to show how ignorant you are.
In tech (and Tesla is a tech company) it’s called L1 support.
You have clearly not read anything about this team. It’s not there to be first line support. It’s there to convince people there aren’t any issues with their cars, regardless of whether or not there is something wrong. I suggest you hang around some Tesla forums where people that have actually encountered this Diversion Team post.
They’re there solely to keep Muskypants from feeling bad about himself and his shitty product.
But sure, go on blaming people buying Teslas for being “bad with technology” when the average Tesla owner is LITERALLY A FUCKING TECHBRO.
Bootlicking is a bad habit. Drop it like I dropped your mom last Saturday.
A recall is a tacit admission that there is a problem, there is a fix, and it will be fixed at the manufacturer’s expense.
Tesla has claimed there is no issue, instituted teams designed solely to minimize the number of complaints about this issue, done all they can to deny that there is a problem, and ultimately is being sued for failing to actually do their damn jobs.
If you don’t understand the difference maybe you need to grow up a bit more before having an opinion.
engadget.com
Active