Bars Technica

by this logic, value is derived by how much labor is required to accomplish something, in this case the labor of learning the skill in addition to the labor of completing the task at hand. a doctor would earn a much higher wage because of the labor required to earn the necessary degrees to practice. okay.

but then if you ask a right winger why the price of a pair of glasses, a mattress, or even a bottle of water is so expensive, despite these things being cheap and easy to make, they’ll tell you that value is not determined by the labor that goes into it, but by need and demand.

Heroism in Hong Kong, 2019

I’d like to thank The American Prospect for giving me the opportunity today to publish my first ever article in an actual established outlet, hopefully the first of many. Here’s why I think we need to break up the Walt Disney Company.

This has been an incredible year for the Walt Disney Company. Not only has Avengers: Endgame become the best-selling movie in box office history, but Disney currently holds all four slots for this year’s top-earning films. However, the company’s dominance isn’t quite something to celebrate.

At the moment, almost 38 percent of all U.S. box office sales in 2019 have gone to a Disney-owned movie, down from a peak of over 40 percent earlier this year. And that’s even before coming releases of Frozen 2, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, and Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker. As we can see by looking at the U.S. box office over the last 30 years, Disney has more than doubled its already significant market share in just five years, reaching an unprecedented point in modern history for a film company…

Within the next couple of years, there is a good chance that the majority of all money made from wide-release movies will go into the pockets of the Walt Disney Company. Even if you consider yourself a dedicated Disney fan, this should concern you…

The Walt Disney Company is no longer the gentle giant of film and animation of yesteryear. Today, Disney is a multinational corporate conglomerate that takes in over $10 billion a year in profits alone. Its consistent growth and strategy of buying out other firms has put the company in a position of nearly unprecedented power in the U.S. media market, and thus in the global media market as well.

My favorite quote (bolding mine):

This is perhaps the best case for why Disney’s monopoly status is a problem even for fans of Disney and its subsidiaries: The lack of powerful competition means Disney simply doesn’t have to make as many films. Based on the numbers above, the Disney of today would likely have never approved the making of lesser-known fan favorites like Air Bud, James and the Giant Peach, Ed Wood, or O Brother, Where Art Thou?, nor would they have agreed to distribute Japanese masterpieces like Howl’s Moving Castle or Spirited Awayin America.

Reduction in the quantity of movies doesn’t mean an increase in quality; it may well mean the opposite. When Disney decides what ideas to put money behind, they aren’t doing it based on the actual quality of the movie, but on its potential profitability. Ed Wood, one of Disney’s worst-selling movies of 1994, has a 92 percent from critics and an 88 percent from audiences on Rotten Tomatoes. Compare this to Beverly Hills Chihuahua, a film that made 16 times as much in net gross but received a 40 percent and 52 percent, respectively. Guess which would get made today?

I’d also cite Tron Legacy and The Black Cauldron as those sorts of experiments that’d never be done today, perhaps even Kingdom Hearts, and I have a hunch that my Disney-fan friend @friendlytroll​ would find that a compelling argument.

But, there is one caveat I will add: Any movement to break up Disney needs to be inherently entwined with the movement to reduce copyright duration, because the current copyright monopoly due to its overextension is what’s fueling this “consolidation creep”

Like, I will say, the way copyright has been expanded and the possibility of narrative crossover (A natural tendency of human storytelling, if you know your history) being tied to the “generosity” of a monopoly is an extremely classic “enclosure of the commons” scenario. 

Doubly so when one considers the re-conceptualization of copyright as a temporary legal protection to a god-given right, or even the backlash that is punching down at people for their desire for crossover rather than protesting its capture.

I say reduction back to 56 years, retroactively as per the previous extensions, is the most solid idea, specifically because of its precedent in previous copyright law and it being long enough to help individuals more than mega corps*, and also because; essentially; if it were done, everything Walt did during his lifetime would be public domain.**

And, I think the public would be way less willing to back Disney, as some of the cynics suggest they would, if the proposition were framed as “Break up Disney and give its stories back to the people,” rather than “Break up Disney, fuck you sycophantic fan-drones” 

So yeah, we cannot separate the fight to break up Disney from the fight to reduce copyright, because the expansion of copyright is the major force driving their consolidation creep. #56OrBust Y’ALL!

*Though, I will say also that in this law there’d need to be a program of reparations paid by the corporate rightsholders to those families whose works will lapse because of this, who did not get proper restitution from the corporate owners of said works in the creator’s lifetimes. 

Cause, the treatment of independent creators as “collateral damage” is far too common in copyright-shrinking discourse, and a thing we need to talk about, but that’s for another post.

Here’s a segment of my article which was cut for length:

Anti-trust laws aimed at breaking up monopolies were weakened to the point of irrelevancy in the 1970’s and 1980’s, in large part due to Chicago School economists who claimed that the laws should only serve an extremely narrow economic purpose. But from the beginning, anti-trust laws had not only economic considerations in mind, but political ones too. In his excellent book on our modern monopoly problem, “The Curse of Bigness,” Tim Wu notes that Senator John Sherman, the namesake of the trust-busting Sherman Act, feared that when “the concerted powers of this combination [‘of inequality of condition, of wealth, and opportunity’] are entrusted to a single man, it is a kingly prerogative, inconsistent with our form of government.”

Others agreed. In Standard Oil Co. v. U.S., conservative Justice John Harlan warned in his partial dissent of “the slavery that would result from aggregations of capital in the hands of a few individuals and corporations controlling, for their own profit and advantage exclusively, the entire business of the country, including the production and sale of the necessaries of life.” Later, in a dissent for another case, Justice William Douglas added that the Sherman Act was passed out of the view that “all power tends to develop into a government in itself. Power that controls the economy should be in the hands of elected representatives of the people, not in the hands of an industrial oligarchy.”

It’s October 2004, and the presidential election is in less than a month. CNN hosts a daily show called “Crossfire” that features two liberal commentators and two conservative commentators arguing with one another and two guests with different viewpoints each episode, in what essentially boils down to a combative regurgitation of talking points. Jon Stewart had a public feud with the show, but on this night he decided to make a guest appearance with Paul Begala as the “liberal” and an at-the-time small fish conservative media figure you may have heard of: Tucker Carlson.

It’s endlessly entertaining to hear Jon Stewart joke that America is not a democracy and to call Tucker Carlson a “dick” to his face on national television long before he had his own Fox show. But that’s not why this appearance sticks out. 

Stewart repeatedly refused to go along with them in bickering about the minutia of the election and directly criticizes the fundamental model of news they’re engaged in, turning this not into a Democrat and Republican bickering at each other, but into both of them as CNN hosts having to defend the channel itself, something that’s never happened before or since. 

STEWART: ...I made a special effort to come on the show today, because I have privately, amongst my friends, and also in occasional newspapers and television shows, mentioned this show as being... bad.

BEGALA: We have noticed. STEWART: And I wanted to -- I felt that that wasn't fair and I should come here and tell you that I don't -- it's not so much that it's bad, as it's hurting America... 

Here's just what I wanted to tell you guys. Stop. Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America. And come work for us, because we, as the people- CARLSON: How do you pay? STEWART:  -not well... But you can sleep at night. See, the thing is, we need your help. Right now, you're helping the politicians and the corporations. And we're left out there to mow our lawns. BEGALA: By beating up on them? You just said we're too rough on them when they make mistakes. STEWART: No, no, no, you're not too rough on them. You're part of their strategies. You are partisan- what do you call it- hacks ...I would love to see a debate show...

BEGALA: We're 30 minutes in a 24-hour day where we have each side on, as best we can get them, and have them fight it out. STEWART: No, no, no, no, that would be great. To do a debate would be great. But that's like saying pro wrestling is a show about athletic competition.

...So this is theater... It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery... you have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably. CARLSON: You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think. STEWART: You need to go to one... You know, because we need what you do. This is such a great opportunity you have here to actually get politicians off of their marketing and strategy. CARLSON: Is this really Jon Stewart? What is this, anyway? STEWART: Yes, it's someone who watches your show and cannot take it anymore...

BEGALA: But [which candidate] would... provide you better material [as a comedian], do you suppose? STEWART: I don't really know. That's kind of not how we look at it. We look at, the absurdity of the system provides us the most material. And that is best served by sort of the theater of it all, you know, which, by the way, thank you both, because it's been helpful.

“Crossfire” was cancelled three months later.

Anyone who has been on the web for more than a few years can tell you that there is a lot of subtext to text-only communication. We had to develop this subtext because it’s difficult to convey emotions without the use of audible speech. As silly as it sounds, the difference between “:3″ and “;3″ is huge and should be noted for anyone trying to understand how people on the internet ‘speak’ to each other.

Homestuck got that. The late 2000s/early 2010s were brimming with a bunch of corporate attempts at storytelling that tried to relate to kids with onslaughts of l33tspeak and dropping hundreds of instances of “omg” all over the place. Kids and teens aren’t stupid, they can very easily tell something is inauthentic. 

We can talk about the plot, simple even in its complexity. We can talk about the aesthetic appeal of the comic. We can talk about the cosplaying community, the music, the interactive panels, the plot twists, the drama, everything. All of this contributes to HS being an incredible piece of work, but it would not have been the same if the characters spoke in speech bubbles or audibly. 

Find a copy of the customer agreement online. Read it. Have the “big cats in boxes” YouTube video on standby so that you can renew your will to live periodically while reading it.

Focus on the sections about cancellation

Examine any terms regarding early termination fees, notice required, proration of the time between cancellation and the end of the billing period, and equipment return policies.

Send a letter requesting cancellation to your carrier via certified mail. Include the date you wish for it to be cancelled. If you are not the account holder but have power of attorney, or the account holder has died and you are managing their estate, send copies of the relevant documentation with the letter. 

The day after, when it isn’t cancelled, call back. Ask for “retention” or “loyalty” and when asked why, state that you wish to cancel. 

They’ll ask you why you want to cancel. Say “I don’t want to discuss it, I just want to cancel my service.” (note: there are times when it pays to disclose your reasons; my company will waive all early termination fees and penalties if the account holder is being entering military deployment or a nursing home. Check their policies.)

They’ll offer something nice. Bundles, discounts, free channels, etc. Say “as nice as that sounds, and as much as I appreciate the offer, I just need to cancel my service.”

When they deflect again, ask how to return any leased equipment. They’ll launch into another spiel about that, thankful that you aren’t making them process the cancellation. Write down the process – they’ll either tell you to bring the equipment to a local office, or they’ll state that they are sending recovery kits. If it’s the latter, ask for the address that the recovery kits return to and write it down (you want to use the recovery kit if you get one, since it’s prepaid, but if they aren’t sent you’ll want to be able to return the equipment yourself.) 

After all of this has transpired, state “As I stated in the letter sent via certified mail on [date], I am ending our contractual relationship and terminating this subscription. Has my cancellation order been processed?”

If the cancellation order has not been processed, tell them to process it. Listen to their spiel. Ask for the date that it will be terminated.

Hang up, wait thirty minutes. Call back, ask if your account is pending cancellation or not. If not, ask to be transferred to retention and ask for a supervisor. Demand that your cancellation be processed and advise them that a complaint will be filed with the FCC if it is not. 

Example: I downloaded Friday the 13th because it’s free on psn. I dunno how to play, so I just enter quick play and I’m matched with 3-4 kids on mic. Immediately on mic they’re shitty and disparaging to each other. They laugh at each others deaths, they actively work against team mates and self sabotage, they call each other “fags”, etc. From the sounds of the voices they cannot be older than 13-14.

I put on my mic and just decide I ain’t havin it. I am nice. I thank them for barricading doors or leaving me items. When they break free from Jason’s grasp I say “good job!” or I try to help them. One kid survived for most of the match by himself. When he dies, I tell him he did a fantastic job.

The mood shift is practically INSTANT. These kids almost immediately stop being dick heads. They start encouraging each other and being kind. After the match all of them try to friend request me. Which should tell you a couple of things:

A) kids want to be kind, and they want to have a nice time playing games. But encounters with adults like me or so rare that they’ve trained themselves to instantly put on a toxic, shitty, defensive veneer when encountering any new person online. It’s literally just THAT EASY to not groom a horrible gaming community, it’s just that NO ONE does it.

B) the speed of which they all tried to friend me was cute, but paints for me such a sad picture? Like these kids are SO desperate to find people to play with who aren’t crappy jerks. They played with me for 10 minutes TOPS and all instantly tried to reach out to me.

Now here’s the thing. Most of these boys, my brother included, have ADD/ADHD. About a week into the project all they had in their shared world was chaos. Somebody filled the place with tnt and lit it up. Holes everywhere. Whenever one would attempt to try and build something (mostly wood huts and not the actual project) it would be destroyed within minutes as the boys began to insult each other heavily and complain that the design was ugly.

I brought my own ipad with me and decided to sit with the boys while they continued their reign of terror. I joined the world and built a hallway out of brick at the very center of this war zone. Immediately one of them tried to destroy it under the impression that “it looks bad”.

“Well, what should I make it out of?”

“Diamond.”

The ten year old mind is a mystery to me…

Anyway, then I showed him some pictures similar to these:

I reasoned that it would be easier to sway this kid toward another pretty block than trying to get him to stick to the materials of the time, so I asked him if he would like to help me replace my brick design with quartz (eh, it’s white).

Bam! One of the ten year old anarchists is dutifully building me a glittering gem hallway for our insanely rich monks.

The other three are off somewhere still yelling at each other and setting off explosives, but we have something built. Much to my surprise the kid asked if he could build the church next because he “wanted to build the most important part”.

Here’s where I learned something important. I don’t have ADD or ADHD but as I said before my brother does. When he gets fixated on something, he’s really gets into it. Once a few minutes had passed and this kid already had four walls up I decided to grid up the entire mission. One gets the church, one gets the farm, etc.

After playing the game with them for an hour, I had a pretty good idea of where each kid should go.

Church kid, I found, was very particular about materials and shape(hence his hangup over the brick). I gave him free reign over the outer walls of the mission and showed him the reference pictures to get him started.

My brother liked the farms most (he was building dirt domes over the cows don’t ask me how I made this connection it just worked, okay), so he was in charge of building pens for the animals.

Another kid was, at first glance, very loud and bossy when it came to decorating (constantly said we were making chairs wrong). Turns out he likes interior design, like putting benches and beds in the little rooms, so his bossiness was just frustration with my brother’s artistic sense I guess.

Another was very good with placing trees and plants around the exterior (I guessed this because he covered the place in a ridiculous amount of trees and I asked him if he would like to know where they are supposed to go). He got to make a vineyard for us and organized how the crops should go.

So how did it turn out?

Actually very nice!!

So what did we learn? Kids actually like to play games and be praised for their creativity and intuition. If I had just told them to stop messing around rather than direct their attention to areas within their interests, they never would have gotten anything done.

After an hour of gaming they:

Mirrored my language; “thank you!”, “which part are you working on?”, “I like this block.”

Realized each other’s strengths; “hey [kid name] can you help me with the roof?” “How do you make the big trees [kid name]?”

Were able to articulate exactly what they did or didn’t like without using force; “that looks good!”, “how about we put it there?”, “I don’t like that block, how about this one?”

Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.

In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling Poroshenko.

“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event, insisting that President Obama was in on the threat.

/…/

But Ukrainian officials tell me there was one crucial piece of information that Biden must have known but didn’t mention to his audience: The prosecutor he got fired was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings that employed Biden’s younger son, Hunter, as a board member.