The people in charge of the program are getting fired, and an outside consulting firm is being hired to investigate. So, I imagine there will be a follow up later on with more details on that front.

It doesn’t inspire confidence that there wasn’t the oversight to prevent this however. These are human remains, not widgets.

I was thinking the same thing. This seems like investigative journalism that’s more public and without the ethics and rigor part.

They are very much as a whole not negligible. They can be–people can get checks for cents sometimes. But they wouldn’t go on strike and sign a deal if it never amounted to anything. I’m not even in the industry and have a passing familiarity with the concept; I’ve just been reading about it and listening to people from it for years.

DGA also has residuals in their contract. IATSE might for some roles, but you can’t feasibly give everyone involved in a production residuals. The point of residuals is to hold over people in roles that are very fickle and can go years between jobs, like everyday working actors and writers. If you’re going years between jobs getting hired for craft services, your food might just suck.

It would be great if everyone could get a share, but that’s not realistic. Big productions can have thousands of people who work on them. Having to send the carpenter on a film a check for two cents yearly would create insane administrative overhead. There has to be a line somewhere.

I know. This is one of my major pet peeves, that even major publications seem to skip copy editing. I’ll forgive it in an independent journalist’s substack, but not much more.

While they are still insufficient, residuals do exist. It’s why SAG and WGA went on strike last year, since streaming residuals were (and to a degree still are) garbage. It’s not as directly tied to sales as if they received points, but with Hollywood accounting that’s a risk. Though if you’re talking about Nebula, maybe this is more about YouTube creators which is a different can of worms.

It really depends. One tenant could have an ant problem because another adjacent tenant is attracting them, which the landlord needs to address. If the structure has decaying wood, that can attract carpenter ants which is a landlord issue. Some ants like humid environments, so a poorly ventilated structure (like one with mold) could be the cause–also the landlord’s problem.

Matt Walsh read this comment and is crying and throwing up as a result.

Judging by how many numerical fields on mobile websites still give me the full keyboard, maybe not.

I’ve never had a fruit salad with the consistency of salsa, but I see where you’re coming from. They are very close relatives.

The article is using as a source a 4chan post that had a docket number that didn’t check out. I’m pretty sure this is a joke someone took seriously because they needed to publish something today.

This would get almost immediately dismissed by any judge.

The shareholders in question suing are a public employee retirement fund. I wouldn’t exactly consider retired sanitation workers and bureaucrats societal leeches, but to each their own I guess.

Frankly for short haul flights it makes sense. Would it be worth paying double or triple for a three hour flight just to get a full meal? Anyone who truly wants a taste of old time flying can get that with a first class ticket, both in terms of cost and quality.

I’m genuinely not certain if you are meaning to reply to my comments because your replies don’t actually reflect what I’ve said. It is possible to have a larger discussion about a topic from a smaller example, and it’s also possible for things to not be all or nothing. I hope you can sort whatever bee is in your bonnet.

I’m not quite sure how you’ve turned “we should have the option” into “we should buy everything foreign.” I think you’re having an argument you want to have rather than addressing the point I was making.

Great, and where local is the best choice they should do that. But nobody can seriously argue that reducing the ability of government to shop around for the best cost/quality balance is a good thing. It’s not like the only options are buy everything American or everything from China. I’d like qualified experts making that decision, not legislators.

You create bad incentives if you artificially reduce competition like this. Not every good or service will have tons of American choices, so you end up with a handful of companies who know the government has no other choice.

I feel like all this is going to do is raise government costs and line the pockets of selected contractors. We aren’t always going to be the relative best producers in cost/quality balance for every product and service.

If we’re going to subsidize any industry, it should be done directly and explicitly. Otherwise, it becomes another example of “inefficient” government that should be privatized.

Marriage does not have to be religious, and it’s not exclusively religious in origin. Many millions of married yet irreligious people who had zero church involvement would take issue with that assertion.

I don’t see the point in doing this even if it was. It’s just semantics. We’d still need a legal shorthand for all the rights and responsibilities currently attached to marriage, as people would still want that. Then it’s just marriage by another name.

Also, I’m not sure any of these countries “force” any church to recognize a marriage they don’t agree with. That wouldn’t change, since I’m sure different churches would still disagree on which marriages count.

I know someone who has a similar outlook (climate change is real but science will solve it, so we don’t need to change anything). Basically anything science produces toward that end they will move the goalpost and say it’s not worth pursuing because science will fix it.

It is essentially their way of making climate change denialism seem reasonable and open-minded. I think if somebody came up with a miracle device to magically reverse everything, they’d complain it’s too costly at any price.

It has either gotten better or just improved its suggestions for me over time. I basically never get right wing content anymore. There’s plenty of garbage, but it’s stupid garbage rather than dangerous garbage.

This is a notoriously difficult thing to prove out either way in data, and I’m sure it varies situationally.

The Mariel Boatlift natural experiment did not demonstrate a decrease in wages or increase in unemployment. It makes sense: immigrants both work and consume (i.e., create demand). Unless every immigrant happens to work in the same industry/union, the sum total of immigrants may create demand for labor equal to or greater than they fill.

It also may have the impact you’re suggesting. But it doesn’t have to be zero sum. And, understandably, people only remember when they lost a job potentially tied to immigrant labor. Nobody asks if the job they’re applying to was created due to demand immigrants added to the economy (and how could a company know that?).