ValueSubtracted

Oh, also:

TRANSPORTER SHOWER

My initial reaction was about how stupid it is to open a theme park attraction themed around a series that's been cancelled, but then I thought about how this thing must've been in the works for several years, and now I just feel sad for the people who worked on it.

hoping his character’s death – in the full context – would make more narrative sense.

Chabon had some lovely and interesting things to say about self-sacrifice being the ultimate expression of the individuality Hugh spent his life working toward, but unfortunately I didn't think any of that came through in the final product.

I'm glad the CBC is revisiting the story now that they have the other side.

Heh, I don't think I agree with either of these takes.

It seems to me like season 1 was very much Michael Chabon's vision - indeed, they've said in interviews that it didn't bear much resemblance to the original pitch that sold Stewart on the series.

I've always felt that Chabon had a lot of great ideas (and to be frank, I still think that first season is the best "Picard" season), but was perhaps too inexperienced to get those ideas implemented in a timely and affordable fashion.

Del Arco not being informed of Hugh's death is a bit of a non-issue, I think - the guy was a guest star, so it wouldn't be right to expect them to treat him like a principal cast member.

Flag restrictions are typically a way to ban Pride flags without actually saying it out loud.

Covering the era from The Original Series, to Star Trek: Enterprise, and the films, the franchise is known for celebrating the beauty of exploration and analyzing ethical dilemmas largely based on societal issues.

Interesting - I guess the newer stuff is covered by a separate license.

The Mastodon version of this Lemmy post should contain the link (and does, when I look at it).

This article does not say threats were made - it says, "according to Chinese Canadian interview subjects, this invoked a widespread fear amongst electors, described as a fear of retributive measures from Chinese authorities should a CPC government be elected."

That's bad, to be sure, but if there was no direct threat, you're going to have a pretty hard time prosecuting the issue.

So...if I were to say online that Donald Trump is an absolute disgrace, and people in the US should vote for his opponent, should I be facing charges in the US? Or maybe my comment should just be nuked?

By no means am I arguing that foreign influence is a good thing, but it's awfully hard to regulate effectively.

That assumes they're operating within the country.

The "pressure" in question is social media content - how do you propose legislating that?