ScrivenerX

I think more convenient and user friendly is a bit of a stretch.

My wife gets confused by the remote and different profiles. My parents needed me to explain how to use Netflix more than once. Saying going to your PC and finding a torrent is convenient and user friendly isn't true. But the point that having to search where to stream a particular movie or show isn't user friendly is also true.

This is a lousy article rehashing an article behind a paywall.

The cost they have is $87 a month. There is so much that's confusing about this. They don't specify how many streaming services they are counting in that, but it's a good guess that is about 5, each at about $17 a month. I feel I have too many streaming services and share accounts with family, and I can stream from about 7, pay for one and watch 1.5. If I couldn't share accounts, I wouldn't have the accounts. I pretty much watch star trek and whatever show someone tells me to watch.

They also don't specify what $87 a month gets you in cable. Around me that's about basic cable prices, which is significantly less content presented in a less convenient format and is almost entirely reruns filled to brim with commercials.

Not only is the article missing key information it also misrepresents the information it has.

Note: I'm sure people will tell me to pirate everything, but there are reasons to not pirate. And it doesn't address that this is a poorly written article giving incomplete and incorrect information.

Sure, but why?

What is gained by a holo-display in your hand? It looks futuristic? If you wanted the experience of talking to someone face to face, why would they be a 6 in version projected into your hand? Why not face to face?

It's solving a problem that doesn't even need to exist. Hologram stuff is poorly thought out in media.

Worse than that, when they are talking on a hologram phone the speaker is always looking down at the hologram and the hologram is looking up at the speaker. On both ends. If it was a hologram of the speaker they would be looking down.

Absolutely!

I'm not sold that any of the cast is super nuanced, but they have personalities that are distinct. You can see a situation and think "that's how La'an would react." I'm still unsure what Nahn does.

I'm not worried.

The reason SNW is better than DISCO and ENT is that the characters are real and complete. We know exactly what type of person Ortegas is, and seeing her do stuff is exciting because I'm invested in seeing her grow and change.

Compare that to Detmer from DISCO, I'm not sure what her job is, didn't know her name for serval seasons and couldn't tell you a thing about her personality. I don't care if Detmer lives, dies or grows. She's a person who exists in the background.

The hard work of establishing the characters is done. I will be happy to see them go stuff.

That is a huge pressure, but it's less obvious why a company in a business unrelated to real estate would want real estate prices high.

The secret is that companies aren't in the business of making a good or providing a service, they actually are just giant schemes for raising money for "investments". For example, airlines don't make their money off of selling tickets, but through prospecting jet fuel. Most companies aren't as direct and clear about what their business actually is.

Also the link between real estate and all of jobs isn't very clear and is very abstract. It's easy to see the costs and interactions with companies forced by working in an office, it's difficult to see how a building losing value effects anyone.

It's because a huge amount of business is centered around made up things for going to work.

Things you need to work in an office: suits, dry cleaning for the suits, dress shoes, a car (because public transportation is woefully inadequate for this reason), gas for the car, maintenance for the car, lunch, daycare, a dog walker, you have less time so you are more likely to eat out for dinner, also more likely to hire maids, you are stuck in a commute and radio is awful, so a music subscription, maybe a new phone, and might have to go out for drinks with the coworkers on the way home.

Staying at home, and much of the country on highly limited income, taught us how much we spend on the "privilege" of work. Everyone is still shocked at the emotional and opportunity cost work had, we're just starting to realize that most of what it sold to us either isn't real or isn't needed.

If people don't go back to work a sea of businesses will fail.

It is!

Most companies make BS solutions for fake problems. Not going to the office exposes a large chunk of fake needs.

Do families really need two cars? If you aren't commuting every day, probably not.

Having more free time means people are more likely to cook and clean for themselves. Can't make money off of that.

How many suits do you need to own? None! You only owned them because you are supposed to wear them in the office.

Dry cleaners? No longer a bill.

Gas? When you aren't sitting in your cities parking lot of a freeway isn't bought as often.

Speaking of parking lots, you aren't paying for parking anymore.

Daycare and dog walkers aren't needed anymore.

Going up work is expensive and companies want us addicted to these fake expenses.

It's always good to mention "famously good" games. I played dark souls a year ago for the first time because of a post like this I saw.

To people who haven't played Undertale; you'll probably like it, it's very good.

I'm confused by your question.

Is your objection cliffhanger endings? Those are more common in American media. Or is it lack of plot progression, which is common across all media? Even shows famous for moving the plot forward never stray too far from the start.

He wasn't "caught red handed" he was caught with a preponderance of evidence implicating him.