Slashdot Mirror
Star Trek: Discovery Nearly Cracks Pirate Bay's Top 10 In Less Than 24 Hours (ew.com)
Yesterday was the season premiere of the first new Star Trek TV series in 12 years. While the first episode aired on the CBS broadcast network Sunday night, the second episode -- and all the rest to come -- was made available exclusively on the CBS All Access streaming service for $6 a month. Naturally, this upset Trekkies and led many of them to find alternative methods to watch the show. EW reports that Star Trek: Discovery "is on the verge of cracking Pirate Bay's Top 10 most illegally downloaded shows in less than 24 hours." From the report: The Discovery pilot is currently at No. 11 on the list (apparently at No. 15 just a few hours ago), the pilot is up there with the likes of HBO's Game of Thrones, Adult Swim's Rick and Morty and, for some reason, TNT's The Last Ship. The show's second episode is at No. 17, which is a tad surprising as that was the one that wasn't free. Ever since the distribution plan was first announced fans have resisted with some vehemence the idea of paying for "yet another streaming service just to watch a single show" (there's more than one show on All Access, CBS is quick to point out, and then a debate over the relative merits of NCIS and MacGyver repeats ensues).
Can't help but notice the dislike of the "single producer streaming source" essentially conflicts with the quite-recent desire for "ala carte" cable without enforced packages. Not clear what is horrible about sub'ing the producers of content one watches at any one moment, and switching those around when one's viewing preferences change. Personally I'm not much of a TV watcher so am not in market for this, but seems strange complaint given the population who does want paid TV content.
:-)
re: the show, can't say it interests me, I am more the sort who wants to see time-line furthered post DS9, rather than re-hash original Trek timeline. And fuck Kirk, Sisko was King.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
Touchy-feely crap? Everyone's actions seemed to be dictated by logic, protocol or violence. Where was the touchy-feely stuff? Have you even seen it?
The Klingons were the worst aspect... Bad make-up, making it very hard to act and deliver lines, bad costumes and ships, lacking the depth and political intricacies that they developed for the Empire in the 90s.
It's a shame the captain died, she was one of the most interesting characters.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
No.
The lead characters are all thoroughly unlikeable. All for different reasons; a ridiculously stereotypical scaredy-chicken science officer, non-descript (quite literally) secondary officers, an arrogant, egocentric and irresponsible first officer and gullible, emotional and passive captain. All thoroughly unlikeable nonetheless. The main protagonist especially.
The camera work also doesn't add; all dark, cold and gloomy. Will human spaceships really be more depressing than the inside of a WW2 submarine?
Orville gets the "feel" of the original ST shows a lot more even though it has it's own problems.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
bullshit, all of the Captain/first officer garbage was touchy feely bullshit, their was fuck all logic to any of their actions. I never said the Klingons were good, but compared to anything on the fucked up federation side in this steaming turd they looked great. how could you possibly think the captain was an interesting character? she lacked all substance and made decisions that went against logic and just plain common sense.
A show like this is going to be too hot. Anyone downloading without using a VPN client is risking a $3,000 fine and possible loss of their internet connection.
I like star trek. But I'm simply not going to watch it.
I have too many other forms of entertainment anyway.
If it's good- perhaps it will be available thru less expensive or less risky delivery methods.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
albeit, in the Donald Trump kind of touchy feely way with women. Kirk's onscreen, campy womanizing would incite screams of outrage if filmed today. Even Bill Clinton would blush when watching that.
Nah, actually he wouldn't. He'd be telling the women they're too old, and then ask for the lolita express for some underage action.
Well, are the Klingons the modern heavy metal African-American Klingons, or the original Hispanic ones?
Neither. They writers decided to double-down on stupid, and inject some type of hybrid of political-cancer-aids-retardeness into the klingons while screeching over identity politics. I wish I was kidding, but as an avid trekie the episodes were beyond terrible and I hope that these idiots have learned something from it. But considering the other BS that they've been trying to push, it'll probably take a few more years of crashing and burning before we get out of this rut.
Om, nomnomnom...
it isn't "radical" to take a pro lgbtqxyz position right now, that is the current default position of establishment in west.
i think what you mean is star trek has a history of siding with the "liberal" "progressive" ideological position. doing that was once radical and risky. now that progressive liberalism is the ideology of establishment, it is neither risky or radical.
I didn't know I chose to be Autistic because it was trendy nor that the people who post comments like that know more than the psychiatrists?
http://saveie6.com/
I don't know why so many people seem to think that Michael is gender fluid or trans or something. Bryan Fuller always gives his female characters male names, it's his signature move. It doesn't imply anything, all the previous ones on other shows have been cis females.
Considering how some people denounced the show as some kind of SJW bullshit before it even aired, the first two episodes didn't have any hints that a single character was gay, trans or whatever. Is just being female or non-white enough to trigger people now?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I didn't know I chose to be Autistic because it was trendy nor that the people who post comments like that know more than the psychiatrists?
Didn't you? That's okay, you can find plenty of "self-diagnosis" and "concerned individuals" who will tell you that you're autistic along with parents who will paint their kids the same for sympathy. Along with plenty of psychiatrists especially specializing in the upper-class who will happily do all of that for you. It's a booming industry in the latter case, especially in the upper-progressive class in most of the west.
But don't worry, I'm sure that this won't hurt the kids at all. Nope not at all, it sure won't fuck them up for life and they sure won't turn around and hate their parents either.
Om, nomnomnom...
Can't help but notice the dislike of the "single producer streaming source" essentially conflicts with the quite-recent desire for "ala carte" cable without enforced packages.
I think you might be misunderstanding the complaint about wanted "a la carte" cable. The precise problem isn't that they have too many channels available to them. The problem is that the price of cable packages are high and rising, and people are saying, "If I'm paying $120 for 500 channels with thousands of shows, but I only watch 20 shows on 4 of those channels. Why can't I save some money by only getting the shows and channels I want?"
So now the content owners are saying, "Oh, you want a la carte, do you? Ok. We'll take those 20 shows that you want, put them each on a different streaming service. We'll charge $10/month for each service, and then in order to justify that price, we'll pack the service with a bunch of other shows that you don't care about. That's what you want, right?"
But no, having a la carte cable wasn't the goal, it was the means. The goal was to save money without losing access to the shows they want to watch. The idea was that maybe they could save money by sacrificing access to the crap they don't want. It doesn't help to give them a new distribution model that finds a different way to bundle crap we don't want, that ends up costing even more when you add it all up.
Republicans control both houses. Republicans are not progressive.
Trump controls the White House. He is definitely not progressive.
Seems to me that the political establishment is fairly far to the right in the US. Even the Democrats are on the right by European standards.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The "conscious self" says one thing, the physical body is saying something else.
From the very first sentence from your link:
Gender dysphoriaÂoccurs when there is a persistent senseÂofÂmismatch between oneâ(TM)s experiencedÂgender and assigned gender.
It doesn't imply that the mismatch is between a purely mental perception and a purely physical one. There are a huge range of conditions that cause parts of the body to more masculine or more feminine than other parts, including parts of the brain.
When people say it is a mental illness, they usually want to imply that it can be cured by talking therapies and the like, rather than by changing the person's gender. Most medical experts view that in the same light as "gay conversion" therapy.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Wait... You paid for an on-demand streaming service... And there were commercials!?!
Fuck that, it needs to die in a fire.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC