sell lemonade. A very good way to make enough money for a whole another lemon. She tried selling other things, like candy and chocolate bars. Adding a bit to their price to gain a little, but this was unsuccessful. Kids didn't want to spend more of their lunch money than necessary. And they could buy the same items for cheaper in the school's cafeteria. She sold one chocolate bar to Brandy. But he was ridiculed for that by other children. So she could not sell to him anymore.
But the greatest performance of all in this movie was crafted by Paulie Litt. He and his Chimpanzee friend ( played by various chimps ) is comedy gold! Why am I not seeing more of him out there?
For some unknown stupid reason I started writing little articles about Moria's Race on blender.community. Perhaps I'm procrastinating. It doesn't seem like anybody reads them. Or at least I didn't see any replies or likes on them. Though, quite frankly, on an episode of Blender.Today ( with Pablo Vasquez ) I saw a title of one of those posts grayed out. This means that he clicked on it at some point. So I believe he knows about the project. And I might get a chance at an interview with him at some point in future if I make an epic enough movie. But quite frankly I though I'd do a whole Blender Conference presentation of my Blender Organizer after I'm Not Even Human. I didn't happen. But I didn't even try to apply. Perhaps it could have been a good show. Who knows.
Sheiny was walking back and forth anxiously. Mr. Humbert wasn't sure what's wrong with her. For the last few months she was excited about her new movie that is about to be released. Suddenly she isn't excited anymore. She is extremely nervous. In her mind every single flaw, every single mistake, every single little hazard. All of the stuff that she didn't make the way that would be the best for the film. All of this was tormenting her. The movie is about to be released but it isn't perfect. But worst of all was the fact that she might have overdone the movie's shock. She was filming pornography for nearly a year prior to the film-project. And she was afraid that the movie is too sexual, too gruesome, too strange. She was afraid that it was too scandalous for people to like it.
She stopped chewing her spinach for a little bit. But then continued scrolling. "Yeah, I know" - she thought to herself - "of course. What else can we wait from politicians.".
We did great so far. A big chunk of the world has freedom of the people at a forefront of its political structures. Many movements for freedom do a lot of good work. And we have a good overall trajectory. But it's not without its problems either. Some folk fighting for freedom instead are misguided to fight against freedom. And the world still has a fair share of various discriminations resulting in many groups of people being less free than others. Some already have movements that are very vocally trying to end the discriminations. Others are still not recognized as discriminations. Also the majority of the world is ran by dictatorial, tyrannical regimes. Which show some sings of hope. But there is very little done to support freedom of the people there.
I didn't write nothing for quite some time. I was preparing to give a talk at Libre Planet 2024. And now that it is over, I guess my mind is a little bit more free, so I will write some more.
A movie titled simply "RRR" is perhaps the greatest achievement in the entire Indian cinema landscape. You are probably familiar with the term "Bollywood". There is a misunderstanding in the world that Bollywood simply means Indian cinema. It's not necessarily true. Bollywood is Indian cinema from the center of India. And Bollywood movies all shot in the Hindi language. India has a dozen or so states and a dozen or so languages. Each state and even each little region of those states have different languages and dialects. RRR was made in the state called Andra Pradesh ( Telugu: ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్ ) where people speak Telugu ( Telugu: తెలుగు ). And the movie is a part of Tollywood, not Bollywood. Though quite frankly, even that is not true, since the director of the film Koduri Srisaila Sri Rajamouli ( Telugu: కోడూరి శ్రీశైల శ్రీ రాజమౌళి ) known as simply S. S. Rajamouli ( Telugu: ఎస్. ఎస్. రాజమౌళి ) treated this film as an all Indian movie, using actors from different states of India, and dubbing the film into multiple Indian languages. Making the film Indian in general, not simply Tollywood.
Being a fan of mostly action cinema, and plot heavy thrillers makes it feel as if Call Me By Your Name has no plot what so ever. But it is a mistake. Luca Guadagnino is a kind of director that tends to film very subtle movies. But if you are paying attention and you are invested in the characters themselves, those movies tend to have very strong effects. This is why I love Call Me By Your Name so much. It is as if I went on a vacation to Italy myself and spent my time with the characters of this movie. As if I had become their friend. And as if I myself got invested in their day to day little struggles.
The project started as a short film idea what I was 15 or so. It should have been roughly 2012 - 2013. I remember being hired by a kid who I believe was a part of some gang ( one of his friends asked me if I wanted to try cannabis ). This kid hired me to draw on his wall. I remember being fascinated with film by that point. And I was already working for some time on Sinking In The Fire. When I was in their house I talked to them about films and that I want to make a film. They were not the kind of kids that could fit the roles of a little girl and an alien. But I could design something to shoot with them.
People look at Moria's Race an immediately compare it to Avatar 2. And in comparison to Avatar 2, it is total shit! I don't have 300 million dollars worth of people to be overworked and underpaid with me. I have only myself and a little of money to keep myself alive. Of course it's gonna be shit compared to something like Avatar 2.
On the other side there are different dictators in different dictatorships around the middle east. If you look at the dictatorship map ( dictatorships in dark blue, countries trying to become democracies in yellow and democracies in green ) you can see that the middle east is mostly a large dictatorship. With some attempts here and there to make something resembling freedom. But without much success. But there is one little county which is a democracy. And it's Israel.
For example the main reason I was so traumatized from the movie, the scene where Jack kills two little boys played by Cohen Day and Rocco Day, is not trying to argue even a little that what the main character does is bad. It does show the horror of the scene for sure. But the whole thing is downplayed by an analogy to hunting of animals and how supposedly brutal the hunting is. And makes it seem like the main character is an artist and a hero for exposing this brutality in a somewhat unorthodox fashion.
There are a lot of little details in the movie that Spielberg glosses over in just the right way, to make the movie so much more re-watchable. I saw this film countless times. And every time I see it I notice more details that I haven't noticed before. How do you make something like this?
The main dramatic story-line in the film is a love story between a grown man and a little girl. The man is Leon. And the girl, Matilda, is played by Portman, in her debut role. At that time Luc Besson was married to a French film actor and director Maïwenn Le Besco, who he met when she was 12, if I remember correctly. And she was pregnant from him at 15, giving birth ( at 16 ) to a girl named Shanna. The movie Leon opens up with an action scene where you are introduced to Leon as a character. But in the same time it has a very interesting inclusion. There is girl in that scene played by Maïwenn, Luc Besson's wife at the time. I think it is important.
It has to be 2011 or 2012 where my mother came to Israel. The idea for the movie didn't come to me before that. I was born in summer of 1997. I was 14 when I left the Jewish Yeshiva. And it was roughly a month ( maybe two ) before that, that I got the ideas for Sinking In The Fire. I remember, when running away from the Yeshiva that it was night and that I wore a t-shit. And on top of that an unbuttoned shirt. So it was not winter. I also roughly remember that I was 14 for only a little bit during the Yeshiva. So you can say it was Summer time just after my birthday. Which simplifies the math. So it should have been 2011 after all.
I'm Not Even Human was a mild success. It got a few thousand views on YouTube. And some people liked it. I thought that it was a nice stepping stone which I can use to start going into serious cinema. Right after the movie was done I was seriously trying to use its existence to justify a studio giving me money to make my next movie that would be an entirely my vision. I would not agree to some other asshole directing it. And I would show them I'm Not Even Human as a proof that I can do something. I got through one phone call with a studio in Israel. And they were quick to catch me on my bullshit. My only movie is not even a little popular. What is a few thousand views? A few thousand views from people that do not need to pay to see your stuff. Compare it to cinema, where people pay money for a god damned ticket! Yes Christopher Nolan's first film "Following" got a few thousand views too. But every single one of those views was paid by the people who came to see it in the cinema.
Apart from that. Even if the scene is boring on paper. Like the scene where they are literally reading documents and trying to make sense of them. Sounds like the most boring thing that can ever be. Steven Spielberg adds action ( even though this time, not dangerous ) into the scene to make the entire thing have a ton of momentum. For example in the scene that I just mentioned, where a bunch of reporters get their hands on the Pentagon Papers and need to make sense of them, right before they open the box with the papers, we learn that a little girl is trying to sell lemonade outside of the house.
Sheiny read a little bit of the text. There was a quote of some person named John Stuart Mill. It went:
The jury were confused. They whispered among themselves. They didn't understand what was going on. But the air in the court was filled with tension. So was the living-room of Mr. Hambleton where he, Sheiny, Chloe and Mendel stood unable to understand the direction of the lawyers thoughts. The lawyer paused for just a little bit to arouse this very tension. He looked at the judge observing the right micro-signals in his expression that would direct him forward in his attempt.
In the country where I live ( Israel ) there is a stupid privacy hazard, ridiculous law, that I didn't feel myself until recently and therefor didn't care about much until recently. It says that there is a limit on how much money can be spent at once in cash. The law in question was there from 2019. And it did shook the people at little bit then, but not enough to not pass. It put the limit at 11 thousand Israeli shekels.
Edwards also is a fan of everything being as epic as possible. The movie had only 80 million dollars in the budget. But it looks like it's 200 million. Edwards knows how to position the camera and how to frame the shot just right, to make everything look big and awesome. While also looking very realistic. He employs in this movie the kind of free, hand held camera style, which makes you feel like you are watching something more real than just a movie. And then in these hand held shots you would casually see a huge ship, or an army of robots. Or other little visual effects things that sell the film. It feels like a real place.
If you saw Close Encounters Of The Third Kind you can probably recall a sequence towards the beginning of the movie where the aliens abduct the little boy. In the Spielberg's version he had to include the wondrous nature of the boy actually inviting the aliens into the house. While the mother is trying to protect herself and him as much as she can. For her it's total horror. For him it's total excitement. Which makes the movie very deep.
The film feels like E.T. but without the aliens. It is a movie about serious things like death, sexuality and aftermaths of divorce. But the film is shot from the perspective of a little 11 year old girl wonderfully played by Anna Chlumsky. She lives with a single father who's job revolves around funerals. And she goes over various traumatic events, the beginning of puberty and heart break. But with that all, the movie manages to be a comedy. Even though you are going to cry in the end.
In 2020 I had a lot of spare time and not a lot of what to do. This is when I started the Moria's Race project. And this is when I wrote Little Naomi. An album that should be listened in whole in the right order, since each song is a scene in a tragic love story.
This little video burned down the CPU of the computer. And I was left with no means of producing anything. Unless of course I would not waste my time and actually design everything. I remember for Avatar they've designed everything. That's when I started drawing yet another comics. Since this was the best way to know what I should design. I outlines a large portion of Space Chabad in a comics form. And other kids actually kind of liked it. They even told me that I should do that as a comics. And not as a movie. I didn't want the comics. I just didn't have the resources to do the movie.
For example on Shabbat Day ( Saturday ) nobody can turn on lights, or turn them off. Or do anything beside resting and eating. Even cooking is prohibited. But some use very little children to flick the lights on or off. Because up to a certain age, the child isn't really responsible to follow any of the religious rules. Therefor he is free to do all that kind of shit. Others might just ask a non-jewish to help flick a switch. The more orthodox do not watch TV. It's electricity and it's turning lights on and off. Most don't even have TV. But some bend the rule, by turning the TV on before the Saturday starts and just not touching it all day long. A lot of Jews even the most Orthodox ones use timers on lights and stuff like that. Some may use those on their TV. Especially if they know what exactly they want to watch and the times of those shows, they could just program a timer to do the switching for them. They don't press anything. So no rule is technically broken. So it's completely fine. Right?
Weirdly enough not only proprietary software does paternalism. A kind of paternalism is even done by the Free Software Foundation themselves. This is why I think paternalism is very dangerous. It often comes from good intentions. Technically speaking, the way FSF did it was not really that problematic. You still have the freedom. It's just harder. They endorse only operating system to which is hard to install proprietary software. If the system developers make it too convenient to install proprietary software, they don't endorse it anymore. Technically speaking they don't say that should not be able to install it. If you couldn't there would not be freedom in that. But still, there is a bit of dangerous paternalism lurking there. And I see why people are a little skeptical of FSF because of it. It's nowhere near as bad as Google Drive or Apple. But there is a bit of that saltiness that I feel a bit weird about.
Forks are a little bit weird. Blender doesn't use Github for development. They have their own git website where they hold only Blender related projects. This is not really a big deal. But that means that forks of Blender exist somewhere else. Technically speaking they do have Github. Which is mirrored from their main git repository. Which allows many people fork it there. And if we look at the number of forks Blender has on Github, you will get a number like 1203.
A moment of awkward silence occurred. Her mother was not aware of Sheiny's little business. So both of them contemplated for a while of whether to say what Josiah Mizukami did. Because even knowing that, could be weird enough for the girls their age. But there was no necessity in telling anything, because the mother came over and looked at the screen herself. She read the title and waved at it as something that was deserved.
Inspired in large ( not only ) by the Free Software Foundation and because of that by Richard Stallman, I became a fighter for freedom. This needed some sort of definition of the goal at hand. What is "freedom"? What is the hypothetical perfect world that I am trying to achieve here? You know, you kind of require at least some understanding of your goal, so you would know if you are getting closer or farther away in relation to it. I found two primary definitions of "freedom". One could be derived from the other. The first definition is probably the one a lot of people are familiar with: The ability to do whatever you want. Some play with the words a little to make it sounds a bit less simplistic. Such as: Not having any intervention is one's actions. Or something along the lines of that. People rarely like it when somebody else controls them. And want to decide everything themselves. And so you could argue that it is the perfect definition of freedom. But it slowly becomes illogical. What if you action, one you don't want to be intervened, is in itself an intervention into somebody's else action? Well here you have an action that is at moment defined as freedom, but it is something, when fighting for freedom you want to stop. This is how you get to the second, slightly more nuanced definition of freedom: Control over one's self ( body and mind ) and things belonging to one's self. And contrary to freedom, Power is: Control over somebody else and things belonging to somebody else. "Power" in this case could be used interchangeably with "Oppression" and "Rape". In which case Rape is the most physical manifestation of Power. Therefor fighting for freedom is fighting against any form of Power including fighting against Rape. Here, though, we get back to the original conundrum. You can't have a society without any for of freedom-enforcement. The so called "law-enforcement" in most parts of the world. The legal structure is therefor managed and sustained with a sole purpose of using the minimal required power to reduce power to the minimum possible state. And therefor every discussion of necessity of a certain law should therefor always be in relation of whether it increases or reduces overall power in the entire system. Granting freedoms as a result. With this I differentiate between 3 types of laws. Only one type of which I support. The two other types of laws I fight to remove from existence because they are unjust. The first type I call "Freedom Laws" which are laws like Freedom of Speech and the Right to Privacy. Also in them a law making Rape specifically illegal. Those laws I support since they limit powers of one type or the other, insuring Freedom. Then there are laws I despise because they are about maintaining of power. Those laws include thing like illegality of criticisms of the state. Or exceptions from law for certain powerful figures. Or more mundane things like copyright. Which is a law maintaining power of one party over another. The third type of laws is tricky and requires some thinking to understand. Often when presented with righteousness of some kind people tend to shove it down other people's throats in a very forceful way. And often they try to establish power structures to optimize that. Let's say somebody found that a certain type of food is dangerous. One way, the freedom way, to go about doing something about it, would be to tell people to be cautious about this type of food. Other way will be to outright ban it and persecute everybody who attempts at eating this food. Which, if you follow my reasoning is a reduction of freedom. Though for a seemingly "justifiable" reason. This type of power is called "paternalism". It is any reduction of freedom of a person, for that person's own good. At least based on the perspective of the one in power. Coming back to the original principle, of freedom being control over one's self, it is absolutely clear that eating that bad food, or making anything that is objectively bad for that person in particular is that person's right. A person should be able to cut his own arm off if he wants to. Therefor I am against all and any paternalism laws. Including, unjust by this metric, ageism laws, like "age of consent" laws. That are the butt of this discussion. Although you can see that I strongly differentiate voluntary participation in potentially harmful activities with involuntary participation. Rape laws are mostly a good thing. And I am against any and all real Rape.
I feel this right now. For the past 3 and a half years my main project has been Moria's Race. A 25 minute long short-film made entirely with Free Software, about a little rebel girl that tries to prove everybody that she has a skill in driving cars.
Funny thing is, people are saying it, that I can work all these jobs, but can I really? I mean I have produced some working software and at least one completely unplayable video game ( it needs a lot of optimization to run anywhere but on my computer ). I don't think I can program in a work environment even if I wanted to. People who see my code structure are often struck with how nonconformitive it is to programming conventions. I hate classes and object oriented style in general. I tend to keep all the data in a huge dictionary to be able to access every part of the program from any other part of the program. I tend to just manipulate data directly when I need something quick. Instead defining a new function to do this job. For the game, I started compartmentalizing my code a little bit more. So I don't copy paste code pieces that I often edit. And instead have a tiny function, that I can link in every nook and cranny, to then edit it, and have it updated everywhere at ones.
He looked around. Apart from his little night-lamp it was very dark. There was light coming from out of the window from the lamps that light up the road. But that was it. He felt tired but he needed to get up, so he forced himself out of the bed.
A lot of people might jump to conclusions that BGE ( the previous incarnation of the engine ) was kind of a bad engine to begin with. And yes, it seems like BGE always was a little more demanding than any other engine at the time. BGE in itself is not necessarily the problem here, though.
If you ask a researcher in Artificial Intelligence how, for example, it recognizes images, his answer will be something about the neural network, or some similar algorithm. A neural network is often visualized as a net of sorts and because of it's complexity it's extraordinary hard to understand what it's doing. It's rather much simpler to explain and Evolutionary Algorithm to you. But even that will fail at telling the exact way a computer tackles any particular problem. Let's say that we can set up a simulation of a virtual environment. For example a little game. Where there are clear rules of how to loose and how to win. And clear controls, or settings to tweak, to win the level. For example: we can construct a randomly generated, road. And place upon it a car which will be designed by the computer. There will be a regular physics engine attached. And the car will break down over time from various bumps in the road. The rule is very simple: to get as far as possible down the road without the car breaking.
Some visuals in the movie are quite awesome. While most of it was shot as if just to cover the craziness of Nick Cage, there were a scene or two where the director actually got a little creative. Though with a lot of help from Cage. There is a reference to Nosferatu, a silent, black and white, 1922 German expressionist horror film about a vampire. A scene from the movie is shown on the TV. And then Nick Cage desperately tries to look exactly the same while walking around in a night club. And it's just the most ridiculous thing ever.
To be frank, the movie was self financed by Patterson, and he had very little money to make this film. So perhaps he had to work with the limitation of being unable to show certain things, and thus used audio more heavily. But the writing that Patterson and Craig W. Sanger did on this movie is so good, you don't care that you don't see nothing.
There is a scene towards the beginning where the little girl needs to ask the mother for a password to download an image from the internet. I was so pissed! Good that the movie actually taught them a lesson to stop doing it.
Something Evil is a little known TV movie from 1972 directed by Steven Spielberg of all people. Steven had a few attempts at horror. Most of them turn out to be less horrific and more psychological in nature. He avoids torturing the audience, but likes to present ideas that are psychologically disturbing, like in Jaws, War Of The Worlds or Schindler's List. This movie is no exception.
While Baby Driver is Edgar Wright's ultimate Micky Mousing film, Scott Pilgrim is more towards the other side of Edgar's sensibilities. The way he likes to play with the cinematic language. From the first frame of the movie ( a pixelated Universal logo ) you are constantly bombarded with Edgar's insane amount of sheer cinematic ADHD. He plays with everything like a child who just discovered a huge studio of people willing to execute every his command. If you know anything about film-making, or if you ever paid even a little bit of attention to how a movie is being put together, this will be an utter over-stimulation of your film-senses.
I was kind of avoiding Peele's films for another reason. I had this feeling that because he is black I now have to watch his movies for political reasons. And it felt forced, so I didn't take a chance to look at those films. Today I realized that I'm kind of begging people to see Moria's Race and using the fact that I worked on it so hard alone to score points against how poorly some of it looks. Don't get me wrong, Moria's Race is leagues ahead the kind of stuff I did on I'm Not Even Human. So I'm still very proud of it. But if we compare it to anything done with 300 million dollars, it's shit. So I am trying to compensate the shitness by using the fact that I was alone. And this made me think that now I even more need to see something from Jordan Peele. And yes. Because he is black. But than, damn it. He doesn't need to use his blackness as compensation for anything. Because the movie is actually damn good. So I think I had a little roller coaster of envy, watching it today.
Sound-wise there are a lot of problems. The movie has a lot of bad ADR. Sometimes the scene will be half ADR and half original recording, which makes the voice of the actor change significantly between takes. A lot of scenes seem to have not enough sound effects. And the music at times can feel a little forced. But it doesn't diminish the emotionality of the film.
I don't think it is necessarily a spoiler, because looking up the movie online would reveal it anyway, there is a very weird scene in this movie. Tom Cruise's character Bill, ends up on a Satanic masked ball full of ultra-rich people. I remember seeing the movie for the first time. Any horror film compared to this one scene is just a joke. This was so intensely terrifying on some kind of a cosmic level that I don't even know how to describe it. It was stupidly scary. With time I got a little used to that scene. And today in particular while watching this scene I was trying to spot whether I'm watching the censored version of the unrated cut, so it wasn't as scary. But boy! What a scary scene that was when I saw it for the first time.
The directors of the film, though, aren't that great. I mean... The movie works. But it feels a little too much studio controlled. It had two directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa, but it is as if either they were clashing with one another, or they did not have any actual vision. Because the movie stylistically is just about what you'd expect. It isn't trying to be nothing more. It's is not an Auteur film.
There was a very big limitation though in those days. And therefor the movie doesn't feel too Spielbergian if you are familiar with his newer films. He likes to move the camera a lot. But in the 70s this would introduce a very big problem. They had an early version of motion control which was used on Star Wars, but in this movie it was used a lot less. And more towards the climax of the film. But since they didn't use it on every visual effects shot, the movie feel a little bit more static than what a Spielberg movie usually feels like.
The main praise I could give the movie is how the main character is portrayed. You know if there is a bad-ass female warrior, she tends to wear very little clothes. Or be covered with tight leathery clothes. And while it could be awesome, it's not what Chocolate went for. I think Chocolate invented the Japanese Kawaii Metal genre popularized by the Japanese metal band Babymetal. It is a very thorough mix of brutality and cuteness. The main character Zen is insanely cute. Not sexy, cute. She wears regular kosher clothes. She wears baggy pants. And she looks like a child. And due to her autism even acts like a toddler at times. And this combined with her insane martial arts bad-assery, makes the movie very emotionally stimulating.
Speaking of sex, here we are dealing with the director of Nymphomaniac, so you will see naked parts of both sexes. He is not the kind of director that censors himself. And more than that, he opened his own studio so he could censor himself as little as legally possible. Therefor sometimes you get borderline pornographic, or actually pornographic material from Lars. Though, in his case and with his sensibilities those scenes are more than just simply porn. And they are there to make you feel a certain way. To make you engage with the emotions on screen and be present within the movie. Like 3D for James Cameron, which makes you feel on Pandora or Titanic, Lars uses everything he can to make you feel what the characters are feeling. And if they are horny, he has to make you horny too. Therefor he shows you stuff to make you horny.
It is very hard to describe the style of Luca Guadagnino, the director of Bones And All. His films are very good. But it seems like he is not interested in plot, which is weird, considering that the movies are good. He is famous for his erotic dramas, films centered around a sexual tension between people, like his perhaps most acclaimed movie Call Me By Your Name, in which all the substance comes from very subtle things. A character looks a certain way on another character. Or perhaps holds onto another character's hand for way too long. And you have to piece together all these little clues to even start feeling some kind of presence of a plot. Because if you don't pay attention it all looks like people just casually hanging out. And then suddenly a payoff happens, which would make sense only if you paid attention to the little clues.
Damien Chazelle is one of the best directors ever. And the fact that he is not 40 years old yet speaks a lot about his future potential. This film was perhaps the most unhinged thing that any studio would ever let him do. And from now on they would probably look after him a little bit, like those producers looking after Spielberg's spending in the early 80s after he made 1941. But I only hope that studios will not do that. And will let Damien do an even crazies movie next time.
Edgar Wright tends to play a lot with the cinematic language. And he also enjoys himself a complex shot or two. Which he is not shying away from in this movie. To be Frank, Wright is not quite Spielbergian. Spielberg, when doing complex shots, tends to make them invisible. So while watching the movie, you don't actually notice the fact that the shot is complex. And he does it primarily for the story of the film. Edgar Wright likes to show off a little bit more. Which brings me to an interesting theory. The most showy long shot Spielberg ever done was towards the end of Adventures Of Tintin. Which Edgar Write co-wrote. Perhaps Edgar pushed Steve to show off a little. Who knows?
The movie, apart from being a comedy, also has a dramatic side to it. So it is a little sentimental. It's not your typical Seth Rogen movie where shit just happens in the most vulgar way possible. Here toward the end I felt real feelings. For Jewish people that know something about the religion it would be even more sentimental. There is a scene toward the end that I felt a lot to, probably because I have so much experience with this religion.
And what happens to those victims? What happens to little girls who survived "statutory rape" ( a form of rape that is rape only on paper )? Well they are being taken away by social workers against their will. Put into prisons. And brainwashed, often violently, out of wanting to have sex with people older then them. If those prisons are Right wing, they will be promoting a traditional view, where they are taught to be good wives to nice men, and never have sex outside of marriage. And if those prisons are Left wing they will be taught that consenting to sex with an older man is not feminine enough. That it is allowing for more oppression. And that it's the girl's duty to say no. But those girls should be the victims! Why are we treating them as the perpetrators? What did they do wrong, if they are the victims, to be treated as if they are the criminals themselves? Oh right: They challenge the status quo. How dare they?!
This confirmed his fears. This thorn person didn't care even a little bit about the whole issue. He was absolutely fine with a core part of Blender's functionality being behind a wall of enslavement. How dare he? A quick answer was needed right away, and so Blender Dumbass wrote back:
Just to clarify to the readers of this article, the characters of Sheiny, Chloe and Mr. Humbert are from my book Sheiny The Hacker. The book is about two little girls ( Sheiny and Chloe ) that using a black-market connection ( Mr. Humbert ) sell illegal pornography that they themselves produce. I guess you can now, re-read the article to get the most cringe out of it, knowing that the two girls are 9 year olds.
This desperation turned into apathy, either toward privacy itself, or for the rest of us toward freedom. And people gave up their freedom to gain even a little bit of privacy. I am afraid that this is what will happen to Free Software.
But here we go back to the problem. To the logical fallacy of reactionary politics. To the left versus the true pursuit for Freedom. The right isn't pursuing freedom. It is playing a game with the left. Since the right isn't really reactionary, it can manipulate the left by choosing to support certain things that break the image of the left if one looks at it from a more logical, outside, point of view. If the right is being pro-freedom, even if a little bit, makes the left be anti-freedom, for that little bit. And the left will come up with the reasons for why they are suddenly anti-freedom, which now could be used by the right to criticize the left.
When you scroll down to the bottom of the page you see a link to Privacy Promise which already sounds a little bit ridiculous. And that I thought was their Privacy Policy. If you look even closer, even lower on the page, with a very small print they have a link to the actual Privacy Policy.
It was just after the chapter VI titled "Can Chloe Break Him" when Mendel was trying to explain himself to Mr. Hambleton. To remind you, the two little girls and Mendel just ran across the town totally naked, screaming curse words and laughing. Until intelligence returned to them and they sought shelter in Mr. Hambleton's shed.
A lot of today's political landscape is just brewing with this kind of insanity. Most cities in the world are filled with surveillance cameras, so just in case something bad would start happening, those in power could respond more effectively. This is already too much waste. This is already almost a complete disregard toward privacy, freedom to control what you want to tell others about yourself, just to increase power a little bit. A little bit! To maybe, possibly, somewhat aid the powers to stop some powers. If we were talking about a bridge. And that it could be stronger if we put one more million dollars into it. And therefor it will less likely to collapse. It is one thing. Yes those needing to pay it would probably be not very found of this idea. But if your bridge's integrity is dependent on it self, it is a completely different problem. If to make it stronger, you need to make it weaker, it is an absolutely inexcusable type of stupidity to do it. With freedom we only have that, freedom. Somebody might want to take it away. But if we take more to stop that person, than what this person could have taken, we are making it worse, by even trying. If to catch one criminal we have to turn the entire city into a surveillance machine for a day. How many people will lose freedom to that criminal in a day, versus how many more people will lose freedom to stop that criminal in that same day?
Now, here is a little complication to paternalism that is very important to take a look at, making the entire debate a little bit more interesting. The kid in question might not know about a danger in question. And therefor mind not want protection. In which case are we suddenly justifying paternalism? Or are we making it a necessity to disclose the danger? How about another complication? What if a child cannot speak? We cannot confirm that the child understands the danger even if said danger is disclosed.
See I couldn't justify being happy or even having anything nice, therefor I couldn't justify money. Therefor I couldn't justify making money. Therefor I couldn't justify working. Though I still felt pressure to pay the rent. So I did work. But only as much as I needed to pay the rent off and have something to put into my mouth. But that started to flake away. I kept getting farther and farther away from justifying money. And that lead me into a cycle of so little money that I ended up nearly on the street.
Then why the hell are we using the word "Intolerance" to describe those people who have an issue about something as silly as that? Those "intolerant" people are not in some kind of position where they have to endure something and just lack the stamina to do so. They have as little possible consequence from any gay or trans person out there as any other person. It is just somehow they decided that this is a problem for them, enough to take action against it. It is not intolerance. It is something else.
Apparently the game is older than BeamNG drive. And not by a little bit. It is almost a decade older than BeamNG. Holly shit!!! But it didn't even stop there.
79th jumped around the room opening his mouth as if screaming. He walked to and fro for a little bit, trying to understand where did Pito failed to understand him and then calmed down and went in front of Pito again. All this time Pito was bewildered by 79th and questioned what he didn't understand. 79th seemed to be agreeing with him, but not agreeing with him. And it made little sense to him.
I'm sorry for such a crude break of the flow of this article. But I just finished a 3 and a half years long project and want you to see the final result. It's a little movie about a girl who really wants to race cars.
They have both professional type cameras competing with Sony Venice. And more pocket type cameras for beginners. But the company is a little strange. Unlike Sony where the professional cameras are super duper expensive and beginner cameras are super duper crappy. Black Magic is not that extreme. The high end cameras that they sell are quite affordable. And the cheaper cameras that they sell are quite high end.
On the other hand the artists, those who enjoy crafting, want to craft. They want to come into a place where they can create. I would be lying if I told you that I didn't enjoy the making of Moria's Race. Every time I chose a shot I was giggling with excitement and anticipation on how people would react to it. Every little nuance that I put was thought about and enjoyed being thought about. Yes, there was a lot of tedious bullshit. For example, the walk animations. Oh my god. I need to automate those. And you can see in the movie that I didn't take too much interest in the walk animations. They kind of look meh, compared to the rest of the film. And I avoided them as much as I can. But hell I enjoyed most of the rest of it.
Sheiny: Our film is more Tor material and less YouTube material. It starts with a masturbating little girl.