The article mentions that. They supposedly released 2 versions, one “enhanced” to help make the relevant parts of the image easier to see, which certainly matches the description of “modified” and the other, the same footage but described as “raw” implying that it wasn’t “modified” in that way.

There are a lot of plausible and likely explanations for the Adobe metadata schema information that is in the file that don’t involve deceptively manipulating footage to hide something that was in that footage before public presentation, then again, given the circumstances and supposed rationale behind publicly presenting this footage, failing to release it with untouched unmodified metadata from the camera original source files is not a good look. Failing to then answer questions about that makes it look even worse. This is is especially true when, although there is no answer they could give that would actually totally convince everyone, there are as I said many plausible explanations they could have offered and yet they were just silent.

Ironically, as is so often the case with anything like this, depending on the interpretive lens you’re using this issue with the metadata helps confirm either assertion, that there was cover up and Epstein was murdered, or that there was no such cover up and he really did kill himself. Obviously, the fact that it’s modified lends credence to the idea they’re hiding something because one might expect that if they weren’t it’d be easy to just supply the footage with metadata more reflective of a surveillance system than Adobe software. However one could also say that, modifying metadata in a way that is undetectable should actually be relatively easy and the fact that they couldn’t be bothered to do that, or didn’t know how, or never thought of metadata being present in the first place could suggest it’s not deceptive skullduggery so much as technical incompetence and sloppiness - too sloppy for competent conspiracists. On the other hand, they could also be sloppy and incompetent conspiracists who just did an awful job. That’s not altogether unlikely either since the entire supposed suicide they potentially conspired to have people believe is a very suspicious cover story to begin with so not exactly an expertly conceived plan, more improvisational and done in a hurry which would kind of track with them botching later actions to take the heat off.

It’s likely heavily reinforced by your voting system but 2 party systems aren’t unique to that system, even in theoretically better voting systems you frequently end up with very similar results. Australia as a case in point. That said if current electoral trends continue we could be seeing the end of that here and at least our system theoretically allows that to happen.

Surprised it hasn’t been superseded meaningfully? Or surprised people are still using it instead of another better tech?

I’ve been using this guy’s one for years. It’s called stretch video

https://gist.github.com/arpruss/74abc1bc95ae08e543b9b74f15a23b07

It’s not often I have to use it but if you ever watch something online where the uploader has messed up the aspect ratio you can just fix it just like that, no need to download and reencode or anything I love it.

No shade on you man, you were young, just wondering if any who isn’t being scammed ever chooses to use that service or of it’s basically dedicated entirely to facilitating scams.

Ah I see my confusion now

His “water fuel cell” was later examined by three expert witnesses in court who found that there “was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and that it was simply using conventional electrolysis.”

I initially took it to mean they’d examined the fuel cell in the vehicle but the way that’s written it’s not necessarily the case so it was probably a separate demo prototype to the buggy.

Yeh, I can send money from bank to bank internationally already. The banks use the SWIFT system.

Haha I never knew there was a real person attached to that myth. I was hearing about that as a big conspiracy theory from teachers when I was kid all the way here in Australia.

That’s interesting he did produce an actual machine that could move though. I was reading the Wikipedia about him and they don’t go in to that exactly. They point out that his design and vehicle were just using conventional electrolysis and thus couldn’t work as claimed, but it still moved. What was the catch then? It uses a battery to do the electrolysis, does it just use up all the battery to inefficienly split out the hydrogen using more energy than gained from the hydrogen in the process? Making it a really weird electric car?

Is Western Union used for anything other than scams? What’s it for legitimately? Can’t you just send money via your bank?

You’re unsurprisingly getting a lot of replies along these lines, taking issue with this strange and unfounded blanket statement about an entire country and you’re replying back to them with similar riffs on the theme that those commenters are being disingenuous and masking a kind of widely known understanding that the reason people visit there is for the sex industry.

I have to say I think you might have gotten the wrong idea there. There’s a kernel of truth to it in that yes, it is known to be a place where sex tourism occurs so you could say it was famous for it, but I also don’t think that that’s like, their thing. Other commenters have tried to persuade you of this by pointing out compelling reasons one might go there other than for sex tourism but you seem unwilling to believe them because of this idea you’ve latched on to that they’re being deliberately naive. I think it might help just to point out that, at least amongst Australians, this is a very mainstream holiday destination, like it’s not a place where anyone would raise their eyebrows to hear you were going there. You could happily discuss this at any workplace and say you’re going to Thailand for a holiday and you’d probably get a lot people saying how much they love the place and asking which part you’re going to. I’d be surprised to learn if somehow all or even most of these people, sometimes families with children, had all gone there for a shag and also that this practice was so widely known that it was somehow a reasonable, immediate assumption to make about why they’d chosen Thailand and yet they also decided to broadcast this intention to everyone they know.

While I don’t know the stats, I would guess that a lot of the world’s sex tourism probably occurs there, so I imagine that’s where you got the idea that that’s THE reason to go there but it’s also just a place where a lot of tourism generally happens.

They’re pretty good, they definitely improve an otherwise pretty average burger. I’ve rarely had them on actual good burgers but on those occasions they were also good, but I think the trouble is that in that context it’s kind of a distraction and just a bit too much added water weight if it’s an otherwise nice hefty and generous burger. They definitely need to be cooked themselves a bit to caramelise them though otherwise not really worth bothering with.

I felt every word of this and it’s so hard and so unfair. I’m really sorry life dealt you this hand and all it’s associated costs. Did you and she part on good terms at least? If you’d been the one to wrap things up a year sooner maybe she’d have taken it hard anyway for assuming she wouldn’t be committed to you. It might be important that she knows you don’t hold any sense of blame or resentment for how it turned out.

Hope you find that happy equilibrium accepting help from your folks eventually, they want to see you well just as much as you want to be well I imagine.

In such a case, does the plaintiff have to actually have a kid though? Like if it’s an open secret that the case is manufactured, do you not get in to any kind of trouble if for example you made up the hypothetical damaged child? Because otherwise some poor kid is still going to have a rough time whether the case is “real” in the sense of a genuinely outraged parent who suddenly decided to sue, or “manufacturerd” in the sense that the story is basically hypothetical and can’t be disproven and the motivations for suing are part of a political movement with backing and strategy behind it.

Black sight? Binocular Superiority? Better Seeing?

This’d be great since it’s a whole lot less morally compromising when it wasn’t even us bumping them off.

Would they have any money to buy anything?

Do I misunderstand emby or does it just not seem like a good deal on the basis of it being an ongoing subscription? I use the free version of emby and it’s really great. There was at least one feature that required payment to unlock. I like emby already and when I tried using jellyfin, the core features that were on both it and the free version of emby worked far less reliably and the paid feature on emby that was free on Jellyfin, worked extremely unreliably. Obviously resources and development had been spent to make something that worked very well and their paid feature probably would too. I use emby to make it easier to cast media locally to my chromecast and to access media on my computer, from my phone in my bedroom, so for me, it’s a fancy file browser and media player. The feature I wanted was to do with free to air tv streaming and I was thinking I’d be happy to pay for the Emby software to unlock this since they made good software that works. But here’s the thing, it’s FREE to air TV and yet they want me to pay, ongoing, in a perpetual arrangement to use it. I don’t get it. I use it to play media, but the media is my media stored on my machines. I understand software development isn’t free, I was happy to pay ONCE, but why would I keep paying when they don’t actually produce the media I use it to play? That seemed unjustifiable.

Bits of it were good. Seems like something went wrong in production or they ran out of money or something. Some of the effects were really good and there was a real mood to the post apocalypse world but it was very uneven especially the way the entire process of civilization ending was just a montage of newspaper headlines. It’s ok to be post apocalypse of you don’t want to show the apocalypse but that was just cheese. Also there were the odd shots that were of just such a lower standard than the rest of the film. Like this scene where a guy climbs up a watertower and stands atop it getting ready to throw a spear and for some reason after the effects extravaganza up until that point in the film it looked a cheap television blue screen that was super awkward. I guess they wanted it to look taller than in reality and show the desolate landscape but it’s so weird that after all the aerial dragon combat they’d pulled off pretty well for the most part that THAT was somehow difficult. I seem to recall storywise there was some very disappointing ending too but it’s been rather too long for me to recall it now anyway.

That’s not totally disingenuous. If you’re cooking for yourself rather than eating out or buying ready made things and you plan to do that a lot of it, some outlay on things that get used across multiple recipes over long periods (can be years with spices) is reasonable to expect and also not to be costed in recipe estimates. What exactly is reasonable to expect someone to have in their pantry already for a recipe is very subjective so what to me seems fair to assume won’t seem so to others, but there are assumptions you can make. You wouldn’t for example criticise a recipe for failing to incorporate the cost of a pan if it tells you to pan fry something or a spoon to stir it or the cost of the water out of the tap. Most of those examples are equipment but I think there’s an extent to which you can write recipes with similar givens for ingredients as well, otherwise it becomes untenable to estimate costs. You don’t typically have to use the same spices as recommended by a recipe either. For some it’s essential but for many it’s just what you like or what you have so, don’t buy 80 quid of spices for one recipe, but if you can figure out which are most important for that recipe and which you also really like the taste of, buy just those and use them in that recipe and many others going forward. You gradually add to your collection as you try new things and when you have some spices and a recipe calls for you to get more, it’s not such a stretch because you’re not buying a ton of them at once just the few you don’t have and consider it worth trying. It takes a long time to get through spices and eventually you get to a point where you have most of the spices referenced in a given recipe or decent substitutes or you only need like 1 extra one that will help you cook more things in future. If you’re sure you won’t use a spice outside of the one recipe you’re looking at, just skip it.

I really appreciate the recent trend of some cooking websites to do this on mouseover. Best of both worlds for readability and convenience. Not great when you’re in the kitchen and not using a mouse, I’d hope a mobile or printable version just writes it out like you did there. Love Auto scaling recipes too where you can click to adjust number of servings, bonus points if they have some logic so they don’t tell you to use .71 eggs or something.