Readit NewsEDIT: The comment below phrases it even better.
If you could watch 100 different mini action movies where anything could happen. Everyone could die or everyone becomes nice and gets a desk job. It is less predictable and would be a fun thing.
What about you want to watch Law and Order SVU but just an average non-crazy day, fly on the wall style. I think that would be interesting.
The action laden sequences are by far the least interesting aspect of Breaking Bad, serving at best as a somewhat believable and tension-relieving climaxes for emotionally taxing, morally difficult and thrilling parts of the show.
The team behind Breaking Bad managed to tell a cohesive, character driven story despite all the creative restrictions making a show for a large TV network causes (think profitability, playing to as broad of a set of sensibilities as possible).
Telling a thousand different stories in the same world and with the same characters drains them of believability and lessens the emotional impact of the stories significantly - they become arbitrary.
Better Call Saul was a good show because it divorced one of the more important characters (but by far not a main character) almost entirely from the original and focused heavily on humor, with light aspects of drama. Breaking Bad was the other way around.
Therefore, I cannot think of a show that is running for it's 21st season as anything more than at best the visual equivalent of easy listening music, at worst a continued cash grab by the studio producing and network distributing it. For a work of art to be meaningful, it needs to come to some kind of conclusion regarding it's content lest it reiterates the same points again and again, becoming boring in the proccess.
Of course, there is something to be said in favor of easy listening music or TV productions intended mostly for basic entertainment, I recognise this discussion is largely predicated on taste. But I think calling something like that art misses the point that has made art historically so important for humans: The intentional representation of thoughts and experiences of the artist(s) in a specific medium meant to elucidate active engagement with the topics at hand.
EDIT: Added a word for clarity.
Rebooting every episode just because the premise is kinda cool and someone wants more of it diminishes what the series achieved both visually and conceptually.
Some researchers in India came up with RISUG, a permanent but safely reversible male contraception. It's literally a piece of plastic, no hormones giving you cancer like female contraceptive, no life subscription to buy condoms and without the risks of a vasectomy. The treatment is so cheap that it never had financial backing and we're still stuck with subpart alternatives.
After being prescribed benzodiazepines I ignored the prescription because of how addictive they are and self medicated with cannabis. That's a substance which can be an alternative (in some cases), it's not addictive and doesn't give you withdrawal symptoms. And yet, it's still mostly illegal and getting a prescription is insanely hard, even when you qualify. Because of a condition I have, I qualify for medical cannabis in the country where I reside and I still haven't been able to get a valid prescription in 3+ years.
I really dislike the handwaving nature with which the very real and especially psychologically quite harmful side-effects of Cannabis are discussed for the most part. Mind you, I believed it to be harmless for the longest time, too.
I wonder if seeing nature as more ferocious, competitive and individualistic that it really is comes from psychological projection.
He was a zoologist apart from all the other topics he had time to deal in because of his noble heritage. Here is the wikipedia article [0] since I do not know how HN regards links to e.g. libgen.
It creates a unique id for Every Melody, but only generates and plays it when the corresponding page is accessed. So I wont generate a huge library of mp3's or something.
This[1] is the website linking to the dataset and code that was used to generate it.
The ‘weirdos’ in the first paragraphs were primarily nerdy men. The landscape has changed tremendously since then - Agile is terrible for many things, but it does not incite racism or bias. Perhaps the only bad thing it does not do.
I was hoping for a better ending to this read.
I need to amend my previous question, actually. Both poetry and prose have fairly popular public outlets in the form of the novel and rap. (Of course rap is a specific form of poetry, but the popular novel tends to take a stereotyped form as well: the romance, the detective story, formerly the pulp adventure...) The best examples of popular novels and rap ascend to the status of high art (really the best type of high art, the high art that is also low art.) But, crucially, a novel reader whose interest is piqued by very good popular novels can fairly seamlessly transition into reading literary fiction, as it shares in large part the form and characteristics of the novel. The rap listener awed by, e.g. Kendrick Lamar's lyricism, has no such path to literary poetry. How do we expect poetry to thrive in these conditions?
And that's not even getting into the historical conditions which mean many people dismiss rap music.
> Plus, it makes a good meme. The hungry crowds on Reddit and Twitter love it: a YouTube video of a discussion on techno-feudalism by Varoufakis and Slavoj Žižek garnered over 300,000 views in just three weeks.
A quick glance at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial suggests that you may have made up the public advocacy requirement:
> (3) Whosoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or downplays an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind indicated in section 6 (1) of the Code of International Criminal Law, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine.[36][37]
Of course the distinction you are trying to draw smacks of sophistry to begin with. From what I can tell, you can be anti-islamic in your own four walls and even discuss your secular ideals with your friends in Pakistan, beacon of free speech, as well[1].
[1] As long as you don't defile the name of a prophet. That seems to carry a mandatory death sentence (plus fine, to really rub it in), even if it occurs within your own walls.
I wonder why so many free-speech advocates are hell-bent on enabling fascists to spread their propaganda. They are certainly not the first but not the last group they will drag to their camps or shoot.
To compare this kind of law to fundamentalist religious law is a special kind of ignorant.