Amentep

I've never read any of the A Song of Ice and Fire books because, when someone first mentioned their existence to me, their recommendation was (paraphrased, because its been too many years now) "You should totally read it, this guy is <rude word indicating carnal relations> his sister...he is so badass!" I only read the Ranma stuff in manga, and it was pretty much a non-kids comedy manga to me. Maybe a bit more stuff simply because of the set-up to the plot (with the body changing) than some others, I guess. Can't really relate it to the anime because I didn't read it, but with the manga I figured Rumiko Takahashi was talented enough to walk whatever line there was and not fall over it.

My thinking is that even if they started with it, it wouldn't work. Hot prospect comes along and everyone NEEDS him or her for their team, and they're going to waive all sorts of fees to get them signed, which in turn will make the other institutions do the same which means ultimately the student athletes won't be paying for it still. Could be wrong.

A student athlete gets tuition and fees, plus room and board, plus their own academic advisors, plus a meal plan, plus their own tutors, plus staff who arrange things for them with various departments around the university for services that the athletics department doesn't provide directly so that the athlete doesn't have to waste their time doing it themselves. Possibly things like their own nutritionist and medical doctors as well, depending on the institution. Not to mention the facilities they play and practice in and trainers to assist them in those facilities. And the coaches. I can guarantee you they have access to many things that the regular student population does not have. I get it, I do. There's a lot of money being thrown around in college athletics. But despite you saying the receive something valuable for their time and efforts, the impression I get is the fact that they are getting an education, plus a lot more, for free is being treated as valueless in these discussions because it is not cold, hard cash in the hands of the student-athlete. The same education most of their entire class cohort is probably going into debt to achieve nor do they get the benefits that so many of the athletes do. Combine that with the fact that I also can't help but feel that some (if not all) of any lost NCAA revenue will be made up by raising fees on the other students - the ones who will be paying their hard earned dollars for the athletes to get more services than they can ever have access to all while those same athletes are also making hundreds of thousands of dollars on top of all the freebies they get - and I can't help but feel that a very big point has been missed in these discussions.

My dad had a Pinto for a very long time. His had a bigger hatchback window.

If it's a topical reference, it's probably to ERCOT putting out a plea for Texans to curtail electricity use earlier this week. https://www.statesman.com/story/business/2021/06/17/electricity-grid-stable-but-ercot-still-calls-conservation/7734436002/

I have a t-shirt with the Forbidden Planet poster on it. Unfortunately, most movie posters these days is digital art that uses publicity photos made for online use since there really isn't the old style print and walk-by advertising like in the old days.

I read the manga (in translation), never saw the anime for Ranma 1/2.

Ah, yes now that you mention it I remember you talking about Pieces. I've seen Galaxy of Terror and Forbidden World, but not the original edit. Lots of weird films in the Alien-derrivative market. Inseminoid, Creature, Xtro... I know Ilsa by reputation only (plus stills and trailers).

Two exploitationier Alien ripoffs, Nazisploitation and...um...Raw Force aka Kung Fu Cannibals. Not knowing what you've seen already, what about Thriller: a Cruel Picture (1973 Swedish rape-revenge exploitation movie, released on dvd). For something a bit different, but indicative of the era, what about Pieces (1982 slasher film, has a blu ray release)

I think its not "your garage door" but "a garage door". Somewhere in the middle of Idaho, there's a guy really pissed off about his garage door opening and closing by itself at random. He crossed Bill Gates once, in 1962. To try to move this away from us continuing to take personal shots at one another, citation only means someone wanted to reference it in their work (we don't know if the citation is to support or refute unless there was somewhere on the linked page to see how it was cited). Peer review has been demonstrated to be a dodgy gatekeeper (see any of the instances where hard scientists troll the soft-science journals with made up nonsense papers using buzzwords and get them published despite supposed peer review). This doesn't mean that the paper has no merits or isn't worth more research to dig deeper into, but I also wouldn't say that my skim through the paper left me convinced by it. Partially this is because I'm a little concerned about the data gathering, but I have to confess its been 20 years since I've had to look at any kind of valid random sampling and don't know how the processes have moved on in the internet age and what kind of validity or skew may be involved. The other part is the data is correlative, which I tend to find worrisome in trying to draw conclusions from since without further random sample study you may be drawing a conclusion based on correlation that isn't actually there. Lines like "PR is strongly correlated (r = .51) with psychopathic personality traits such as a tendency toward angry, impulsive behavior [46]. Accordingly, confronting people who refuse to wear masks could be hazardous. Indeed, there have been media reports of people reacting violently when confronted about not wearing masks." seems worryingly like a conclusion (based on news reports) that someone wanted to back up with data (as there seems to be no mention of media reports of people reacting violently when confronting a person not wearing a mask as that would detract from the paper writers goal). But hey, I'm not a psychologist and my statistics studies are waaaaaaaay behind me.

The only one I see on Ebay looks to be a bootleg (but that doesn't mean it can't be sourced from a high quality European blu rather than a sloppy VHS transfer).

If the Ilsa films had a blu ray release in the US market, it'd be news to me. I know Anchor Bay did a dvd collection, but nothing about an official Blu.

I don't doubt the veracity of what she experienced, but my point is that private colleges and universities aren't beholden to the state beyond certain basic requirements (almost entirely fiscal) to meet eligibility for students to receive federal financial aid. A private institution is beholden to whatever entity backs it (if one still exists) and to whichever accrediting agencies they belong to. She's surprised they're 'allowed' to be 'anti-American', but that misses the point of...well a lot of things.

It really should be titled "North Korean defector goes to a private liberal-arts college and is amazed the US government doesn't force them to teach a specific ideology".

The problem is that the "on paper" neutral race-blind review of income/assets vs default rates vs risk of similar businesses vs location & overhead vs etc. isn't going to take into account a history of racist laws or application of laws have resulted in lower asset/higher debt accumulation within large parts of African-American communities (not all, obviously, there are plenty of successful business people who are of African descent). Just one example could be to look at the effect of redline practices that indicated where an African-American could buy a house into the 50s and 60s in most areas - they were usually in lower valued areas, which means that owning the house generated less assets for the family over time. Now, unless the area is undergoing gentrification, the house is probably still not going to be worth as much as a house in another area from the same time period, which in turn means its value as an asset towards a loan now for the inheriting family member as compared to a similar house / lot from the same period in a neighborhood that was not historically a part of redline prohibitions is much less.* That's just one thing, and that's assuming house ownership was even a part of the initial equation. *while anecdotal evidence, I grew up in a neighborhood that went from majority white to majority black while I was in elementary school after redline practices were ended locally (as I understand it). The value of houses where I grew up are greater than houses in traditionally and historically black neighborhoods pror to the end of redline practices (excepting those that are undergoing gentrification and a few areas that have always been an area to live in town) and are less than those in areas of the county that did not transition away from majority white neighborhoods for similar sq.ft house on similar acreage.

I doubt the 1836 project will mention that. It sounds to be a 'rah-rah Texas' style thing.

I think the argument is that, if an individual of a minority race does everything 'right' and still becomes a 'victim' of inequality in institutions (or application of institutional rules), then eventually the minority race is going to learn that they're damned if they do and damned if they don't, so there's no societal incentive for them to abide by society's rules. One of the simmering tensions seen in some African-American neighborhoods is that what few shops exist in these neighborhoods are typically owned by Asians. There has been resentment that African-American's are more likely to be denied a business loan, and therefore are incapable of transferring their capital into a business that can then grown the wealth of the family, but the Indian or Pakistani or Korean can, and can do so in their neighborhood. This resentment can then lead to violence between the two groups, but the resentment is fostered by a system that plays favorites, which one could argue was a systemic inequality (which is, I think, what the article writer is essentially describing as white supremacy)

Iirc "that" is a reference to the just finished section where he says 2 or 3 things he would do, and one he would not.

Japanese trailer has different footage -

Ned Beatty

It was better than those dreadful kid episodes that blotted last season. But they don't do a good job developing Amanda as a character, or explaining the Q angle to the story. Arguably q himself is more annoying as well. But still better than those kid episodes.

TNG: True Q Q Qs around while a Q who doesn't know they're a Q struggled with Q-ing. Riker gets Q-napped and Picard gives speeches. An OK episode.