I don’t believe the US knows his location. Mojtaba hasn’t been seen publicly since he was appointed.

Ali was (according to current public information) only successfully targeted due to CIA assets inside Iran tracking him and confirming a time where he would be in a building vulnerable to a strike.

Edit: There is speculation he, along with other Iranian leaders, is in Mashhad in the far east of Iran. That however is only speculation online based on people looking at images of Iranian leaders who have been giving statements, and I can not judge how credible that speculation is.

Well, you assume we don’t have that problem in engineering.

Huh? What?

I’m working on finished systems designed entirely in metric, only designed with metric hardware. Installed with that metric hardware. The only way SAE hardware finds its way inside is when US technicians, who work for customers and not for my company ram it in there. Engineers are not consulted when they do this.

For example, to prevent easy access, or to required a tool that we can provide because we want the acknowledgement that access gas been required.

We just use metric security screws for most applications. Everything is supposed to be physically accessible by technicians who are theoretically qualified. Sometimes though they just aren’t.

I’m not talking about the engineering side, I’m talking about an environment where some systems are metric and some are SAE, usually based on if they are US or European designed. In these environments, technicians who are sometimes not terribly well trained, who are doing daily work, will mix and match the wrong screws into the wrong systems.

It may just be “a” screw, but as I said it leads to these same people accidentally stripping them, which makes certain parts inaccessible until the stripped screw is removed. Which is a headache on top of whatever the actual headache reason is that I’m removing the screw in the first place. It’s extra yak shaving.

Anger does drive up engagement, but the point of engagement farming is supposed to be so that you keep coming back to the content (YT videos, articles, whatever) and therefore it gets more exposure so that the attached ads get more exposure.

The ads themselves designed to make you angry at them doesn’t seem to make sense, at least as a default practice. There’s really only hyperspecific niche scenarios where the ad itself making you angry at the ad is beneficial to the people paying for it.

That’s the craziest part isn’t it? All of this data collection so they can build profiles of us, and then they just don’t apply any of it to ads.

I don’t like watching ads, but it would at least be slightly more tolerable if I got ads for things I actually wanted. On my TV I watch YT unfortunately not adblocked, and never once have I seen an ad for anything that appeal to me.

BLOCKS YOUR PATH.

I think with The Matrix specifically it has to do with the physicality. Late 90s Will Smith was in shape and could do big, bombastic action, but I can’t imagine him doing precise martial arts moves without it looking like a comedy.

It is crazy how I always think of that movie as “early career Will Smith before he became famous quippy superstar” but it released between Men In Black and Wild Wild West.

I imagine him throwing some Bad Boys type energy into the lobby shootout.

It’s just an infinite number of Will Smiths eating an infinite amount of spaghetti.

Imagine the tie-in music video he would have done.

The Van Halen radiation belts rock too hard though.

Atlantis was, if I recall correctly, intended for a while to be the successor. The plan was for the SG-1 show to end with the Atlantis mission beginning, and then the Atlantis show to be the next stage of the Stargate franchise. What ended up happening was the Atlantis mission kicking off but then also TV people in charge wanted to keep the SG-1 show going so you had the shows airing at the same time. That is partially why SG-1 mildly turned into a zombie version of itself. Certainly not as bad as other shows, but I could still feel it.

I guess I’m still not following how if I’m using say the nvidia geforce screen recording software which is capturing the display of my screen how the browser knows. Since the browsers has already gotten the image and displayed it and the recorder is recording the display instead of, intercepting (I suppose is the best word) the data before it is displayed.

Netflix being an application that is running on a TV seems like a very different situation than a video playing inside of a browser. How exactly would YouTube know or be able to stop screen recording short of forcing me to actively run a program?

Maybe I’m not following but this seems to be talking about applications communicating with hardware designed to be authorized to play.

How would a video playing on a browser like YouTube on my existing, old hardware be able to parse what’s authorized? Short of making YouTube a program on my computer, how does it on a browser know what else I’m running?

I already just use screen capture recording to take videos in my desktop playing YouTube on a browser. Could they even stop that?

Then they can clarify it for themselves. Talking about actors working in voice acting industry, in TV production, means adults more often than children doing the work. Not always, but adults are more common than children. It is a reasonable assumption, and if it is wrong, again- the poster can clarify it on their own.

Hey, I’m coming in and matching your energy.

I was being civil and didn’t insult anyone’s opinion or “lol” at what they were saying until you showed up doing just that. We can look at the thread and see exactly where I started having bad energy and it was after you came in acting like an ass. So in actual fact, I’m matching your energy as it is exceedingly rare for me to insult other users, in fact it might be a first for me here, but you managed to be special.

crazy assumption to make

Fuck off. Seriously. You’re just coming in and making an opposite assumption based on the exact same vague statement and acting smug about it.

That’s why young boys are usually voiced by women

Not a word in there about children doing the voices. If they wanted to clarify a supposed ambiguity, they could have done it themselves.

You coming in and very confidently declaring exactly what they meant despite nobody talking about children doing children’s voices, and giving your “correction” it in a condescending way:

What the heck are you talking about?

That’s a wild way to misunderstand them lol.

That makes you the asshole. Be gone.