Colitas92

You have root access in pixel phone and can install custom ROMs like graphene OS.

Yes, that is pretty much how WeChat works. It is mostly a glorified messenger and payment system (like current whatsapp), that they added a proprietary webbrowser with addons and storefronts on top (and wechat gets commission from said webpages and addons people access through them).
You could maybe get a similar experience in Android if you install Firefox, save a bunch of commercial websites as favorites, save another bunch of social media websites as favorites, add whatever addons there are (ublock origin for the win), and access stuff only through it.
Voilá, now you have an everything app.

If i was in a righteous mood, i would say :

1 - Paying for consuming media older than 30 years is a perversion of the intellectual property idea, of supporting artists for a short window of time by artificial restriction of the right to culture and knowledge, and then to release the works to the public domain for the enjoyment of society. That the capitalists extended said window to be the death of the autour + 70 years, and then invented the idea of owning the art-invention-etc made by worker-artists is the real robbery of the situation. The current phase of studios trying to leverage AI tools (and AI tools that are essentially industrial scale pirates AND plagiarists) to make even more exploitation of artists is not surprising to me.
I forgot to add: the original north american idea was 14 years + 14 years, if the artist made a request for extension to get the 2nd period. Imagine if we had 14 years copyright now, everything made 14 years ago would be released and available to watch or even to make derivative works...

2 - I am not north american, i am third worlder (Brazil). So, since i have the money and time to spend, i prefer to spend money on domestic artists and domestic works to benefit my nation, which is a lot poorer than western artists and populations, and with much less famous cultural works. Instead of giving (more) money to Disney, i can go on music shows or theater here, or sign up one of the local streamers, and pirate the foreigner's content i want. Brazilian artists, that really need the money and attention, i try to pay whenever possible (if it is even available). For films made by disney (and equivalents) ... they will make enough money from cinema release here and from their foreign rich country, no need to give then a monthly transfer on top. The book Open Veins of Latin America is something of a reference in this type of reasoning.

I would counterargue it is different from a traditional price increase. Netflix basically ''backstabbed'' their consumers, by altering the contract they followed for years and even repeteadly made marketing and promises in that regard (all the ''sharing netflix with family and friends is an expression of love'' posts).
If the price had increased, it would be another reaction, but this new house limitation is really a petty move that feels a lot worse. I hope the other streamings just increase the price and let people share the same account.

And when someone is short on money or just too tired of keeping track of which services having what media and switching chairs all the time ? remember there is always the way of Jack Sparrow, and go sailing to the 7 seas. ARRRGH!

Also 100% agreed. If anyone really wants a more inclusive term with positive vibes, i already read ''abrahamic heritage'' , to include jews, christians and muslims going for the commom ties of the mutually recognized first patriarch. It was a random french scholar though, but maybe we can gain traction. God (the abrahamic god) would be pleased.

Depends on the use case of the person operating the computer really.

I recently installed EOS (with LXQt), and all i really did was install it using the GUI, install some of the app selection offered in endeavors introduction GUI (including flatpak), saved the webadress of arch repository, aur repository, and flathub.org, and then learned

• yay -S (package name of aur and arch repository)
• copy-paste flatpak install command from flathub.org. installed everything i used. Then i searched how to list the packages in flatpak and pacmac, how to uninstall both, and voilá, i was ready and had everything i ever used, with less than 10 terminal commands.

Hoping to see how the sixth final miyazaki film will be like.

I prefer to watch films that are good to great, no matter the time as long as the artists know how to use the time well and make the work worth to watch. There is fantastic works that span the whole spectrum, from short films to lenghy films, and there is trash all the way too (Some director compared it to paintings, that range from tiny papers to whole walls). If we really think about it, any anthology series like Black Mirror and The Twilight Zone 1959 are just a collection of short films that share a theme, some recurring stage crew, and etc. If i am short on literal time, i have no problem stopping and taking multiple sections to watch a film (purists have some point that it loses a little of the impact some times, but most of the time it really does not).

I think it is 2 reasons for the trend:

• Cinema-at-home technologies just keeps getting so much better all the time, and it is already pretty great. Streaming and 80 inch 4K OLED TVs are just the latest iteration of a process started in the 1950s with tube TVs, and if VR-AR glasses popularize they will be the next. Cinema Studios and Cinema-at-theater companies had to invent new immersive technologies and art forms to stay competitive, from the rectangle screen form (16:9) until IMAX 4-D etc. They also artificially benefited the cinema-at-theater by having the release window schedule (3 months in theaters, another 6 months to dvd, 1-2 years to tv, etc), that has been diminushed but it still exists (6 weeks to 2 months in theaters i think), and in our FOMO infested culture this might make theaters stay in the long run in some form or another. But overall, home has never been such a sweet place to watch cinema.
• The endless rat-race to keep cinema-at-theater competitive with cinema-at-home has eventually made that only Blockbusters in high tecnology cinemas are attractive enough to most people, and to pay for all this sensorial spectacle that ranges from the theaters to the films themselves, the scale of capital costs in the whole industry has just risen to the roof, and now the tickets are usually very expensive (and foods drinks etc). The average consumer in turn, feels that going to a film in a theater has to be WORTH it, has to be better than home and has to compensate for the high ticket (and foods etc) price. This means that films have to be a Spectacle that is highly sensorial and lasts a lot of time to become a memorable Event in the persons day, week or month. So, longer run times.

There is a cinema industry that is already more advanced in these characteristics: it's Bollywood, with the Masala genre (i.e. a spectacle that has to please the whole family, and they include at least some romance action drama dance music in every film) and many hours of lengh (4hr is not unusual). Because the average indian is poor, and they go to the cinema rarely, so the indian studios have to make it worth it, an Event for the whole family, like Hollywood has to now. There is also something of a Music Show vibe, where the audience cheers and claps when the stars appears on screen, and actively engages with the film throughout (booing a vilain , lamenting a death scene, etc), it reminds me of the marvel spider man 3, but times 10 and all the time, it's a cinema-at-theater experience also unmatched by home, because of the collective element. Maybe Bollywood is the mirror that Hollywood has to emulate now, instead of the other way.

My take: Companies can not take actor's body image «for free forever» like they are trying to do, it is just theft and illegal.

If Disney wants to , say, take Harrison Ford body and make an Indiana Jones 6 with ‘‘him’’ (an animated rendering of his body), then they have to pay royalties, negotiate a contract, etc with the person, the same way any of them would do with their IPs. In general, everybody should have their body as their own IP really, by default and retroactively. With largely the same rules as the very IPs of these mergacorporations, so they enter public domain after a while too.

PS: i really want my AI-generated Buster Keaton and OG Popeye short films …

Well, i think they can pretty reasonably argue that the companies can not take their body image «for free forever» like they are trying to do, it is just stealing at that point. If Disney wants to , say, take Harrison Ford body and make an Indiana Jones 6 with ''him'' (an animated rendering of his body), then they have to pay royalties, negotiate a contract, etc with the person, the same way any of them would do with their IPs. In general, everybody should have their body as their own IP really, by default and retroactively. With largely the same rules as the IPs of these mergacorporations, so they enter public domain after a while too ( i really want my AI-generated Buster Keaton short films ... ) The actually analogous situation with us mortals getting replaced by AI, is if the Studios just straight up invent AI actors and actresses from the start and register them as their IP, and does not hire real life actors. So, an AI John Smith, that is just a program owned by Disney that their production uses in films (can we really call then films at this point ? for me everything will just be Animation henceforth). This is more probable in the long term, it even already exists in some subcultures, like some J-pop singers that are programs made by fans.

now that you mention, i have plenty of addons on all browsers i use. Maybe i could have made it work by testing one by one, though the chromium browsers all worked out-of-the-box even with largely the same addons. I just do not have the patience for it now, and settled on using Vivaldi for chromium stuff when really needed, which should not be often.