Yes, I remember the emotional end to the directors cut of Planet of the Apes well, in which Charlton Heston bemoans the loss of value in his portfolio.
A New Zealand tribunal has dismissed a woman’s claim against her then-partner after he failed to take her to the airport, leading her to miss her flight ahead of a concert with friends.She accused her boyfriend at the time of allegedly breaching a “verbal contract” in which he agreed to take her to the airport, stay in her house and look after her dogs.According to a legal document which only gives the applicant and respondent’s initials, the woman (CL) said she asked her boyfriend (HG) to collect her from her home and take her to the airport between 10:00 and 10:15am.But he failed to do so, she told New Zealand’s Disputes Tribunal, which deals with small claims up to NZ$30,000 (£14,526).As a result, CL said she missed her flight and had to foot the bill for additional costs, including travelling the next day and putting her dogs in a kennel.In her claim, she went on to outline the minutiae of the inconvenience she faced, including costs for a shuttle service to the airport.The couple had been in a relationship for six and a half years until the dispute.Before the case was dismissed, the tribunal looked at whether the woman’s boyfriend had entered a contract to take her to the airport and look after her dogs.
The tribunal also looked into whether the pair had entered a contract in which the boyfriend had said he would incur the costs for a separate ferry trip to visit the woman’s sons.CL said she paid for hers and her partner’s ferry fares, and wished to be reimbursed for the cost of his ticket.Conditional to both of those being true, the court looked at whether the boyfriend breached the alleged contract.It concluded that for an agreement to be enforceable, “there needs to be an intention to create a legally binding relationship”, which was not the case for CL and HG.
“Partners, friends and colleagues make social arrangements, but it is unlikely they can be legally enforced unless the parties perform some act that demonstrates an intention that they will be bound by their promises,” tribunal referee Krysia Cowie wrote in the decision document.
"When friends fail to keep their promises, the other person may suffer a financial consequence but it may be that they cannot be compensated for that loss.
"The referee found “the nature of the promises were exchanged as a normal give and take in an intimate relationship” and fell short of being a contract.
"As I have found that the parties made their agreement in the context of their friendship, CL has not shown she is entitled to the order that she seeks and her claim is dismissed.
The original article contains 454 words, the summary contains 446 words. Saved 2%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
A family friend graduated from a liberal arts college, had an R congressperson come for commencement. He just rambled about AI and also medical advancements like the US hasn’t had a falling life expectancy. Probably a pretty similar speech to this robot’s.
I had a huge argument with art curator over how a wall a black is not art. Got in face about how if it’s that easy I should just do it. I’m like bruh I did it in My room as a child. Modern art is soo pathetic.
I mean, if that’s the example you’re going for… It’s actually quite easy to imitate Van Gogh, yet everyone has a reproduction somewhere at home. The fact that it’s easy to imitate doesn’t make it less artistic. If your vision of good art is photorealistic paintings, maybe you should open your mind about it. Have you actually been to some contemporary art exhibitions? I’m not saying you have to like everything but there’s some amazing work being done by passionate people. Generalisation like “modern art is pathetic” doesn’t seem to indicated a real understanding of art and intentions.
Like the guy who pooped on a tile and had it made into production and then tiled a room with it? Or who made a machine that eats and generates human like feces? Or the dirt room exhibit which is just a room in a building full of dirt?
I get they are trying to express themselves but that doesn’t make it inherently profound.
This like saying “hip-hop suck’s because insert douchebag rapper here___ exist.” It clearly shows a lack of understanding of the nature and intentions of art, and it usually comes from people who never never actually even tried to understand it. Being cynical is easy, taking interest in something requires an intellectual effort, which is a thing that seems to be unpopular in modern society. Some people are just better off with ticktock I guess.
Replication is relatively easy. Origination of a new art style is not. It’s the same reason why anyone could make a Jackson Pollock painting but it won’t be a jackson pollock.
I get to go to some contemporary art museums for work. Just another example, the creepy sounds, videos, and installations are just horror show stuff. Like I think the people who made it need mental help and I queue in a line to see it which makes me feel worst. I want to be inspired by art to do better not feel like crap afterwards or feel scammed. Never understood intention in art. I don’t want a backstory. It should speak for itself.
Well I actually made a career of what you call “creepy sounds”, lol. It’s called electroacoustic music. Once you take more then a few seconds to listen to it, the “horror” impression quickly goes away.
Refusing to do any intellectual effort is what led to some young people limiting their cinema experience to marvel movies. I mean, it’s basically visual fast-food, fun from time to time but there’s so much more to discover. I get that it might not be your bag, but spitting on every contemporary artist’s work because you don’t like it is way too closed-mind. I personally don’t care about anime, never have, but I get that some people are into it and don’t need to say they’re all stupid. I’m actually sure I would find some amazing things if had time to look into it. Maybe I will someday. I suggest you look into modern artist. Ai Weiwei is a good start for example.
Maybe your right. I was there for few minutes, confused, and left. I know humans are easily influenced so it’s possible I could not have given it a chance given the Half the things in the museum was ready to be in The Ring. So I can go in next time with a different mentallity, What’s the expected human response ?
Checking out Wei Wei in under a minute. Fountain of light, love it. The other samples totally lost me. Forever bicycle is impressive but induces anxiety. Sunflower seeds is an example of something I take issue calling itself “Art”. It’s painted seeds leveled to appear like carpet. What intellectual effort am I missing?
Well that’s refreshing! Thanks for reading my reply and having an open-mind about it! I get that contemporary is not for everyone, but I think most people can be surprised if they just gave it a chance. Lot’s of great (and bad, of course) artists out there. Glad you look at Ai Weiwei’s work. If you get past first impressions and look behind the surface, you’ll see that he never does anything without a reason. Sunflower is an interesting example: it’s not a painting but 100 million (!) porcelain sunflower seeds scattered on the musuem’s floor. Each hand painted if you can believe that. Sunflower seeds are a important symbol in China, and Weiwei is a fierce critic of China’s political regime (pretty much all of his works are about it, he actually went to jail for it). I’ll let you make what you want of this but I think there’s more then meets the eye to this specific work. Cheers
Arguing with people that something “isn’t art” is what’s pathetic. Art is subjective. Maybe let people enjoy what they enjoy instead of being a massive bellend about it
I don’t care someone likes a accent wall. My issue is no one deserves a pat on the back for something people do regularly. Do something special if you want to be remembered for your art. More upset with the people who enable this. I met way better artists in college that won’t ever get thier dreams come true and this dude gets “famous” Tragedy is the only wat to describe this.
People want to see a conspiracy and a murder here, but it’s well known that being a whistleblower can be incredibly stressful. The US government says:
Practice self-care and stress-reducing activities throughout your whistleblowing process. It is common to experience toxic forms of retaliation – from professional isolation to gaslighting (manipulating someone by psychological means into questioning their own sanity) – which can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, or even thoughts of harm.
About 85% suffered from severe to very severe anxiety, depression, interpersonal sensitivity and distrust, agoraphobia symptoms, and/or sleeping problems, and 48% reached clinical levels of these specific mental health problems. These specific mental health problems were much more prevalent than among the general population.
I can’t remember where I saw it, but a while ago I saw or read an interview with a representative for a group that was famous for working with whistleblowers, something like the ACLU or EFF or something. Even though you’d expect that they’d really encourage whistleblowers, they said the opposite. They said that being a whistleblower is basically going to destroy your life. It’s going to ruin lifelong friendships. You’re going to be incredibly stressed. You’ll probably be blacklisted from your chosen field of employment even if your claims save lives and are proven to be true. So, they asked anybody who wanted to be a whistleblower to think about it and if they were absolutely sure to come back and talk to them again.
I vote we force anyone whose incomes is more than 35% of their income is investing to be either sent to the front lines or be used for military testing.
“You come to our town hall meeting, it’s one thing to try to get attention. They got their attention. But literally, they wouldn’t stop screaming insults at me. They wouldn’t … even let me answer the very questions they were raising.
“I got two words into it and they started screaming at me again. So this is a different thing than your standard protest. In my view, the solution to it is if they are committing a crime – which by the way, shutting down a freeway, shutting down an airport, intimidating people, there’s a crime – [they] ought to be arrested.”
Protesting at public figures’ homes should also be subject to arrest, Smith said.
“The point of it is intimidation. And I think it is harassment. It’s a crime, and I think [they should] be arrested for it.
It sounds like what he is complaining about is protestors not being civil, not letting him speak at his own event and going to his house. I don’t know if that’s a fair complaint given the circumstances, but a little different than the headline implication that he’s broadly accusing people objecting to Israel’s actions of being fascists.
nottheonion
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.