![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/9677e716-69d1-40b0-80e1-99b81d23256d.png)
It’s Business Insider. They are very pro-capitalist.
It’s Business Insider. They are very pro-capitalist.
The third one is AC/DC. You shook me all night long.
I think typically they only turn on when they actively detect something near the sensor. Once they no longer detect the object, they shut off.
Indeed he did. Years ago, they were holding auditions in my area for a new guitarist after Wes Borland left. They asked people to demo stuff they had written, rather than try to play along with their current songs. After auditions wrapped, they didn’t pick anyone and life went on.
Cut to a few months later when their next album dropped. The local rock station that helped sponsor the audition starts getting numerous calls from people saying the material they demoed during the audition got incorporated into songs from the new album. No credit or compensation was given to any of them. From that point on, the radio station rightfully blacklisted them.
Along those same lines, Limp Bizkit because of Fred Durst. They still would have been pretty mid, but maybe I wouldn’t go out of my way to skip their songs when they sneak onto my playlists.
Fuck Fred Durst. Fucking riff-stealing crybaby.
I prefer to think of them as antisocial media.
You misspelled wonderful.
Nothing. That’s the whole point of federation.
Other instances would still be online, and it would be business as usual there.
There would likely be discussion about it on other instances, but Lemmy wouldn’t shut down just because .world or .ml went offline.
“The one with the rifle shoots. The one without follows. When the one with the rifle is killed, the one without picks up the rifle and shoots.”
I totally agree that it is most likely a way to balance short - and long-term income, but I guess I’m not financially savvy enough to see how a well established studio would prefer the former.
To your second point, especially for an established IP with universal appeal like the movie in question, I just can’t understand how anyone thinks the return on marketing and distribution vs. potential income would be a net negative. Remember, they’ve already made the movie, so the productuon costs are sunk.
In any case, I appreciate the detailed response.
Can anyone ELI5 how it’s preferable for these studios to write off finished productions like this vs. releasing them and making additional profits?
I love the irony of you calling out other people for not reading the post.
Israel’s conduct has been absolutely deplorable and indefensible from the moment they started indiscriminately bombing civilian homes. That doesn’t make it ok to mock the deaths of innocent people, regardless of the circumstances.
This shouldn’t surprise anyone. Hell, the IDF shot three Israelis without provocation.
The company is older than that video.
I’ll throw my name in for Elden Ring. Cheers to you for doing this OP.
Kids these days will never get to experience the joy of finding woods porn.
No.