The tech to monitor said emails wasn’t there yet.
LOL wut. email has always been the least secure medium going. If anything email is probably more secure now than it was in 2006. The only reason anyone in 2006 would think it was guaranteed privacy is if they just didn’t know anything about email.
That’s my whole point, it wasn’t Ballet Vision’s option to exercise, it was Kibbutz Hanita’s, but the opening summary erroneously describes it as the exact opposite. Here’s from later on in the article:
As part of the agreements, the Chinese fund granted the remaining minority shareholders an option to require it to purchase their remaining shares for about $9.5 million, now valued at roughly $11 million, by early December 2025.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/putoption.asp
(edit: I had a little search just now to see whether it was true that China have made it illegal to invest in Israeli companies. Half the results were literally reporting on this story, and the other half of results were about Chinese companies actively aiding illegal Israeli settlements, which makes me suspect that BV’s claim that their hands are tied is bullshit.)
accusing it of refusing to exercise an option
Was this written by an AI or by an illiterate? That’s not what the rest of the article says happened. The Chinese fund didn’t refuse to exercise the option, they refused to honour an option that they’d already signed. The opening sentence makes it look like Kibbutz Hanita are pulling a fast one, when it’s the exact opposite.
Ostensibly, yes. As far as I can tell from their entry in influencewatch they also do something called “pro-Israel legal advocacy”, but I don’t know what that is. Either way it’s not a great look having Epstein’s consigliere on board.
Mitch Webber’s original email to him was essentially “yeah you’re golden, fuck as many minors as you like, just bring them to another state first”. And he still seems to have kept his job at (checks notes) an antisemitism group.
…what would happen if one were to transport a minor for sex — or transport oneself with the intent to have sex with a minor — into a state in which the age of consent is below eighteen (assuming the minor is above the age of consent in the given state)? And your intuition was right. The answer is that there is no violation of law.”
Let’s be clear: everyone has a right to be represented by a lawyer in court, and we shouldn’t judge lawyers for defending rapists because they’re literally their job. But that’s not what’s happening here; this is him actively helping Epstein figure out the best way to rape children.
It’s sad how the internet has somehow made the quality of ostensibly professional journalism so much worse. It was supposed to make things better.
wait what? I thought like 99% of the point of edge services was to protect you from DDoS? I would hope that they wouldn’t bill you in cases like that.
Every little helps. Perfect is the enemy of good and all.
Also there’s a lot of food that’s not necessarily grown or manufactured in the US but still goes into the pockets of American companies such as Mondelez, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Mars, Heinz, Kellogg’s etc.
It’s more that context is important. The thread is about “Police Unions”, so it’s not surprising that people would read “Company Union” as meaning a union at a commercial enterprise by contrast, rather than the highly specific and obscure 100-year-old definition that you’ve used that distinguishes a company union from a trade union.
You can either prance about in the thread about how dumb everyone else is, or you could edit your original statement to clarify what you meant rather than throwing up a load of links.
Oh well if the jury failed to convict that must mean it didn’t happen, along with the dozens of similar accusations made by other victims.
They’re not sound logical reasons, they’re terrible bits of hand-wringing, armchair psychiatry, and lame excuse making that make a deliberate choice to ignore both the clear damage done to his victims and the massive pile of evidence of the things he did.
Also, I didn’t call him a pedophile, I said he abused children. Which he did.
Sounds nice, but they’d definitely find some way of gaming the rules so that it ended up going to shit as a concept.
The kinds of people running Amazon-MGM-Paramount-Skydance-Disney-Blackrock-StateStreet-Vanguard are the sort of psychopaths that would deliberately sabotage it just to teach those pesky legislators a lesson about trying to tell them what to do.
Maybe a better idea would be to add public screening of movies over 30 years old under Fair Use, and require studios to share their movies with a copyright library in order to maintain copyright protection for streaming/dvd so that they can’t just DRM the thing itself.
Always seemed insane to me that copyright terms have been extended to the stage where the only people making a profit off a work are people who had nothing to do with its creation.
I don’t understand how this notion is so readily accepted.
Tons of people have difficult childhoods where circumstances forced them to grow up quickly, without them developing weird childhood obsessions that involve them inviting other people’s kids to share a bed with them.
(edit: mind blown at how many people are lining up to defend child abuse. He didn’t have a childhood, which gave him the right to take other kids’ childhoods from them? Y’all must really not want to give up that awesome record collection.)
You can take it literally at face value. They want to know about you, so they asked. The idea that an interviewer would conclude that “renovated my house” is a wrong answer that get you blacklisted, is something that person seems to have just decided for themselves.
Too many people think of interviews like they’re exams, where there’s a set pass mark. There isn’t. There’s just, would I rather spend the next few years working with person A or person B, let’s ask them some questions to find out.
I’m still bitter at Steam for taking a bunch of my single-player games off me that I’d already paid for when I moved to another country, and refusing to refund me because I’d already played 10 hours. Also the support guy treated me like I was a criminal for even trying.
I’m glad we’re seeing more theatrical re-releases these days. About 42 weeks of the year there’s no new releases worth watching, so why not have something good on even if it is old.
There isn’t a single question you can possibly ask in an interview that doesn’t have a million threads like this complaining about it and assuming the worst about its intentions or what the interviewer will conclude from its answer.
The general rule seems to be that any kind of question that you might do badly on, is a bad question.
I’ve noticed they’re ok with arresting celebrities for sex offenses, just not politicians or CEOs.
Where are those numbers from? They disagree with https://shotonwhat.com/skyfall-2012 . The IMAX release was done as a film print, which likely wasn’t made from the regular HD cut.
I think they’re exactly what their username implies.