Any has experience fighting this boss in Elden Ring? Thoughts on the fight?

I downloaded the season packs from RARBG (by BTN, ION10 and DEMAND) but I don't like the quality of the torrents. Earlier seasons do not have subtitles. Some of the later ones that do have them are downloaded from addic7ed rather than ripped from source. Moreover the volume level is really low across the board. Anyone knows any better quality torrents on public trackers? Direct download will do too. Thanks.

[Tweet](https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1649310750127554561)

There is this YouTube channel called The Michael Parenti Library which has a bunch of Parenti lecture videos. I ripped the audio from them, did some very minor processing and uploaded them as a podcast. So if you want you can listen them through whatever podcast app you use (if you use one). Spotify link: https://open.spotify.com/show/0xKKAAcZUgnlg88k1KXKee RSS feed: https://anchor.fm/s/ddf4dbd8/podcast/rss

There is [this TikTok clip](https://proxitok.pussthecat.org/@feleciaforthewin.bts/video/7209794988983684398?_t=8atuOui3rQz&_r=1) suggesting that the currently ongoing TikTok Senate hearings are a result of media campaign paid for by Meta because they could not compete. If this is true, why cannot they compete with TikTok? I know there are YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels. Why don't they do as well?

I was thinking of getting an Odroid N2+ to use as a Jellyfin/Plex server. What other things can it be used for? I know there is RetroPie but I have no interest in that. Any other suggestions?

I found this twitter thread about the aftermath of the "controlled combustion" as it was called: https://nitter.1d4.us/FalconryFinance/status/1624051231554510848#m Things look really bad. The evacuees won't be able to return their homes ever again and the burning is causing an ecocide in the vicinity. There is very little coverage for all this though. I read that reporters were being arrested but wasn't able to look further into it. Edit: balloons are getting orders of magnitude richer coverage than an incident that has essentially left 5000 people without homes and their pets dead along with most of the life in the area.

[This is the article I am talking about.](https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream) Every circumstantial evidence and common sense argument would suggest that the US was to gain the most from this attack. But deranged liberals of all ranks, from mainstream "journalists" to the rabid NATO defenders of lemmy.ml, tried to gaslight you into thinking that at best the jury was still out on who did it and at worst accused Russia for doing it even though they stood to lose the most because of the outcome.

Recently ran into someone'e personal website. This is the footer on it:  Clicking on the hyperlink takes you to:  This gave me the idea to add a similar prompt directed towards Americans that links to: https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html

I didn't know that the American Christian movie industry had the resources, time or know-how to make a knockoff of Finding Nemo. I guess it makes sense considering it's the religion of choice of the settler population there and is used as a cudgel to enforce "American values" or whatever.

Not sure why. I feel it's because I feel that the day was been squandered.

Hmm? 🤔

Trying to improve my schedule. VPS host purged my post from yesterday.

maskless florida pizza church

Well it's true that emissions from flights of all kinds are a massive problem. But I am trying to think of a scenario where this is helpful and I can't. Seems entirely performative. I would much rather be able to take high speed rail than a flight.

Title. I tried searching but couldn't find a simple solution.

The US has introduced sweeping export controls that will severely complicate efforts by Chinese companies to develop cutting-edge technologies with military applications, in one of the toughest actions President Joe Biden has taken against China. The commerce department on Friday unveiled restrictions that will make it very hard for Chinese companies to obtain or manufacture advanced computer chips and will slow their progress in artificial intelligence. The measures are also designed to make it much tougher for China to develop supercomputers with military applications that range from modelling nuclear weapons to development of hypersonic weapons. The controls mark a new attempt to decouple China from the US in cutting-edge technologies. They come days before the Chinese Communist party holds its 20th national congress at which President Xi Jinping is expected to seal a third term as leader. Paul Triolo, a China and tech expert at Albright Stonebridge, a consultancy, said the action was a “major watershed” in US-China relations and in the increasingly intense technology competition between the two countries. “The US has essentially declared war on China’s ability to advance the country’s use of high-performance computing for economic and security gains,” said Triolo. The controls will hit Chinese companies in multiple ways. They will bar US companies from exporting critical chip manufacturing tools to China, which will affect groups such as Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp, Yangtze Memory Technologies Co and ChangXin Memory. They will also prohibit US citizens and companies from providing any kind of direct or indirect support for semiconductor fabrication plants in China. The US also put YMTC — along with 30 other Chinese entities — on a list of “unverified” companies, paving the way for possible inclusion on a separate blacklist called the “entity list” that would effectively bar US companies from supplying them with technology. “The administration’s strategy is to deny China the capability to indigenise its semiconductor industry. If the US is successful, this causes a huge problem for Beijing’s strategy to be a world-class player,” said Martijn Rasser, a security and technology expert at the Center for a New American Security, a think-tank. Underscoring the scope of the controls, the US is using a far-reaching mechanism called the “foreign direct product rule” to make it harder for China to develop and maintain supercomputers and AI technology. The rule — which was first used by the Trump administration against Chinese technology group Huawei — in effect bars any US or non-US company from supplying targeted Chinese entities with hardware or software that contains, or has been manufactured with, American technology. But in an effort to reduce supply chain disruptions, the administration will carve out an exception for chipmaking facilities in China owned by companies from the US or allied countries that are exporting chips. “The PRC [People’s Republic of China] has poured resources into developing supercomputing capabilities and seeks to become a world leader in artificial intelligence by 2030. It is using these capabilities to monitor, track and surveil their own citizens, and fuel its military modernisation,” said Thea Kendler, a senior commerce department official. “Our actions will protect US national security.” Analysts said China’s memory chipmakers, including YMTC and ChangXin Memory, would feel the most immediate blow. “They are basically doomed,” said Mark Li, a semiconductor analyst at Bernstein in Hong Kong. “It will be very difficult for them to get the equipment they need. But the ban on the export of semiconductor tools could significantly hurt Chinese chipmakers more broadly because US equipment makers have a stranglehold in a few key niches. Triolo said there would be “many losers”, including US chip design leaders such as Nvidia and AMD, and tool makers including Applied Materials and Lam Research. He said the rules would also hit non-US players, including ASML, the Dutch company that produces the most advanced semiconductor tools, and TSMC, the Taiwanese contract foundry company. One chip industry executive said the US was attacking China “from all angles”. “The stunning thing about this move is that they have assembled a whole array of tools,” the executive said. “They are not just targeting military applications, they are trying to block the development of China’s technology power by any means.”

Thoughts on this?

For those unable to watch, the clip is from before the war began. Biden says that in the event of a Russian invasion into Ukraine, there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. "We will bring an end to it." The reporter asks how they would do it since it's outside US jurisdiction. "I promise you we will be able to do it." Edit: [Full interview (03:42)](https://piped.kavin.rocks/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8)

Oh no someone is cutting onions

> The Family Code went through a rigorously democratic process. From the first process of consultation, where more than half of the Family Code was modified, to the second part where through the mass participation of Cuban people over 40% was modified, the collective process of the enactment of legislation becomes clear. > > The Family Code was also written in understandable language so that the Cuban people could easily comprehend the legalities involved. The code is intended not just for use in courts of law, but also as an educational document for families to use as a guideline to understand their rights and responsibilities. > > The final step of the process, the national referendum, will serve to legitimize the Family Code. It doesn’t impose any kind of model on Cuban families; rather, it protects all people and families, and future families, as required under the Cuban constitution.

Removed him talking about Minsk Agreements to make him look as unreasonable as they could

Tweet: > BREAKING: China has announced the end to the following cooperation with the US > > 1) Calls with leaders > 2) Defense meetings > 3) Maritime Security Consultation > 4) Climate Change Talks > 5) Anti-Drug cooperation > 6) Transnational crimes > 7) Illegal Immigration [**Official announcement from the Foreign Ministry of China.**](http://new.fmprc.gov.cn/zyxw/202208/t20220805_10735604.shtml)

::: spoiler Full article *August 2, 2022 at 10:52 a.m. EDT* Some 43 years ago, the United States Congress overwhelmingly passed — and President Jimmy Carter signed into law — the Taiwan Relations Act, one of the most important pillars of U.S. foreign policy in the Asia Pacific. The Taiwan Relations Act set out America’s commitment to a democratic Taiwan, providing the framework for an economic and diplomatic relationship that would quickly flourish into a key partnership. It fostered a deep friendship rooted in shared interests and values: self-determination and self-government, democracy and freedom, human dignity and human rights. And it made a solemn vow by the United States to support the defense of Taiwan: “to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means … a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States.” Today, America must remember that vow. We must stand by Taiwan, which is an island of resilience. Taiwan is a leader in governance: currently, in addressing the covid-19 pandemic and championing environmental conservation and climate action. It is a leader in peace, security and economic dynamism: with an entrepreneurial spirit, culture of innovation and technological prowess that are envies of the world. Yet, disturbingly, this vibrant, robust democracy — named one of the freest in the world by Freedom House and proudly led by a woman, President Tsai Ing-wen — is under threat. In recent years, Beijing has dramatically intensified tensions with Taiwan. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has ramped up patrols of bombers, fighter jets and surveillance aircraft near and even over Taiwan’s air defense zone, leading the U.S. Defense Department to conclude that China’s army is “likely preparing for a contingency to unify Taiwan with the PRC by force.” The PRC has also taken the fight into cyberspace, launching scores of attacks on Taiwan government agencies each day. At the same time, Beijing is squeezing Taiwan economically, pressuring global corporations to cut ties with the island, intimidating countries that cooperate with Taiwan, and clamping down on tourism from the PRC. In the face of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) accelerating aggression, our congressional delegation’s visit should be seen as an unequivocal statement that America stands with Taiwan, our democratic partner, as it defends itself and its freedom. Our visit — one of several congressional delegations to the island — in no way contradicts the long-standing one-China policy, guided by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, the U.S.-China Joint Communiques and the Six Assurances. The United States continues to oppose unilateral efforts to change the status quo. Our visit is part of our broader trip to the Pacific — including Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan — focused on mutual security, economic partnership and democratic governance. Our discussions with our Taiwanese partners will focus on reaffirming our support for the island and promoting our shared interests, including advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific region. America’s solidarity with Taiwan is more important today than ever — not only to the 23 million people of the island but also to millions of others oppressed and menaced by the PRC. Thirty years ago, I traveled in a bipartisan congressional delegation to China, where, in Tiananmen Square, we unfurled a black-and-white banner that read, “To those who died for democracy in China.” Uniformed police pursued us as we left the square. Since then, Beijing’s abysmal human rights record and disregard for the rule of law continue, as President Xi Jinping tightens his grip on power. The CCP’s brutal crackdown against Hong Kong’s political freedoms and human rights — even arresting Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen — cast the promises of “one-country, two-systems” into the dustbin. In Tibet, the CCP has long led a campaign to erase the Tibetan people’s language, culture, religion and identity. In Xinjiang, Beijing is perpetrating genocide against Muslim Uyghurs and other minorities. And throughout the mainland, the CCP continues to target and arrest activists, religious-freedom leaders and others who dare to defy the regime. We cannot stand by as the CCP proceeds to threaten Taiwan — and democracy itself. Indeed, we take this trip at a time when the world faces a choice between autocracy and democracy. As Russia wages its premeditated, illegal war against Ukraine, killing thousands of innocents — even children — it is essential that America and our allies make clear that we never give in to autocrats. When I led a congressional delegation to Kyiv in April — the highest-level U.S. visit to the besieged nation — I conveyed to President Volodymyr Zelensky that we admired his people’s defense of democracy for Ukraine and for democracy worldwide. By traveling to Taiwan, we honor our commitment to democracy: reaffirming that the freedoms of Taiwan — and all democracies — must be respected. ::: --- This was the basis of a tweet her account posted as well. She says: > Our visit [...] in no way contradicts the long-standing one-China policy However there is stuff like: > By traveling to Taiwan, we honor our commitment to democracy: reaffirming that the freedoms of Taiwan — and all democracies — must be respected. Can't think of this as anything but a provocation. Also Washington Post being literally just a mouthpiece of the US state. Not that it's new or surprising.

>@IntelWalrus > >👀 Apparent confirmation that SPAR19 is actually heading to Taipei from an ACARS message that was ust sent! Mission controllers asking about IFF encryption also included the flight's destination of 'RCSS' which is Taipei Songshan Airport (ICAO: RCSS). #Pelosi #Taiwan EDIT: Apparently she has landed: https://nitter.42l.fr/IntelWalrus/status/1554478603974447107#m

Original: https://music.163.com/#/album?id=121309421

::: spoiler Article HONG KONG—Billionaire Jack Ma plans to relinquish control of Ant Group Co., people familiar with the matter said, part of the fintech giant’s effort to move away from affiliate Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. BABA 1.32%▲ after more than a year of extraordinary pressure from Chinese regulators. The authorities halted Ant’s $34 billion-plus IPO in 2020 at the eleventh hour and are forcing the technology firm to reorganize as a financial holding company regulated by China’s central bank. As the overhaul progresses, Ant is taking the opportunity to reduce the company’s reliance on Mr. Ma, who founded Alibaba. Mr. Ma, a 57-year-old former English teacher and one of China’s most prominent entrepreneurs, has been the target of government action that appears designed to reduce his influence and the power of his companies. He has controlled Ant since he carved its precursor assets out of Alibaba more than a decade ago. Over time he built it into a company that owns the Alipay payments network with more than one billion users, an investing platform that houses what was once the world’s largest money-market fund, and a large microlending business. Ant was expected to be valued at more than $300 billion had it gone public. Advertisement - Scroll to Continue Diminishing his ownership could put back a potential revival of Ant’s IPO for a year or more. Chinese securities regulations require a timeout on public listings for companies that have gone through a recent change in control. Mr. Ma doesn’t hold an executive role at Ant or sit on its board, but is a larger-than-life figure at the company and currently controls 50.52% of its shares via an entity in which he holds the dominant position. He could relinquish his control by transferring some of his voting power to other Ant officials including Chief Executive Eric Jing, after which they would collectively control the company, some of the people said. Ant told regulators of Mr. Ma’s intention to cede control as the company prepared to convert into a financial holding company, the people familiar with the matter said. Regulators didn’t demand the change but have given their blessing, the people said. Ant is required to map out its ownership structure when it applies to become a financial holding company. The People’s Bank of China has yet to officially accept Ant’s application to become a financial holding company. Any change of control isn’t likely to materialize until Ant’s restructuring is complete. Advertisement - Scroll to Continue Mr. Ma has personally contemplated ceding control of Ant for years, some of the people said. He’s been concerned about the corporate-governance risks arising from being too reliant on a single dominant figure atop the company, those people said. The charismatic founder addressed those risks at Alibaba years ago by setting up a partnership structure to ensure a sustainable succession as its first generation of leaders moved on. He gave up the CEO job at Alibaba in 2013 and stepped down as chairman in 2019 when he retired from the company. He currently holds less than 5% of Alibaba’s shares. The need to end Mr. Ma’s control at Ant gained new urgency as the souring regulatory environment spurred Ant and Alibaba to cut their ties. On Tuesday, Alibaba revealed seven top Ant executives had stepped down from the Alibaba Partnership, the top echelon of management at Alibaba and its subsidiaries. The two companies also terminated long-running commercial and data-sharing agreements that had given Alibaba an edge. Mr. Ma previously held back from giving up control of Ant because he didn’t want to delay the company’s plans for an initial public offering, some of the people familiar with the matter said. The scuttling of those plans—after Mr. Ma laid into financial regulators in a speech—removed that obstacle and created a fresh opportunity for Mr. Ma to resolve the matter, those people said. Advertisement - Scroll to Continue A change in control could mean that Ant will have to wait a while longer before it tries going public again. Chinese securities regulations state that companies can’t list domestically on the country’s A-share market if they have had a change of controlling shareholder in the past three years—or in the past two years if listing on Shanghai’s Nasdaq-like STAR Market. Hong Kong also imposes a waiting period but only for one year. Ant’s scuttled IPO plan included simultaneous listings in the former British colony as well as Shanghai. Ant is in no rush to attempt an IPO again and intends to keep its options open, some of the people said. The company could consider other moves including spinning off units that could in turn be listed themselves, those people said. Mr. Ma controls Ant through an entity called Hangzhou Yunbo Investment Consultancy Co., which in turn controls two vehicles that together own a little more than half of Ant’s shares. Mr. Ma has a 34% stake in Hangzhou Yunbo. The other 66% is split evenly among Ant’s CEO, Mr. Jing, former CEO Simon Hu, and veteran Alibaba executive and former Ant nonexecutive director Fang Jiang. The billionaire originally owned all of the entity. He transferred two-thirds of the shares to the three executives in August 2020 before Ant filed its IPO prospectus. At the same time, Mr. Ma was given veto power over Hangzhou Yunbo’s decisions, according to the prospectus. The arrangement was designed to give the other executives more say in Ant’s affairs without triggering an effective change in control that could delay the IPO, a person familiar with the matter said. Advertisement - Scroll to Continue Mr. Ma could cede control of Ant by diluting his voting power in Hangzhou Yunbo via giving up his veto and transferring some of his stake to other executives, the person said. Mr. Hu, who resigned as Ant’s CEO last year and recently retired, and Ms. Jiang, who left Ant’s board last year, will likely exit Hangzhou Yunbo and be replaced by other Ant executives. In addition to Mr. Jing, Ant’s most senior executives are now Executive Vice President Xiaofeng Shao, and Chief Technology Officer Xingjun Ni. Mr. Shao is also the general secretary of Ant’s Communist Party committee, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Ni was instrumental in founding Alipay in 2004. Mr. Ma’s control over Ant goes back more than a decade to the period when he was CEO of Alibaba. In 2011, it emerged that he had carved the payments business Alipay out of Alibaba without the knowledge of key shareholders including Yahoo Inc. and SoftBank Group Corp. Alibaba argued the transfer was needed for Alipay to secure a Chinese license that might not have been granted if the company had foreign shareholders. Following the move, China’s central bank in May 2011 gave Alipay a license to operate as a payment-services company. Yahoo and SoftBank were later compensated by an agreement that allowed them to share economic interests in Ant through their ownership in Alibaba. In 2014, Ant Financial Services Group was created to hold Alipay and other financial businesses including consumer lending. The company in 2020 changed its name to Ant Group. Write to Jing Yang at Jing.Yang@wsj.com and Raffaele Huang at raffaele.huang@wsj.com :::

Someone shared all episodes from Blowback Season 3 which is behind a paywall as of now. It's about the American invasion of Korea.

Kratos is gonna merk Thor and wield his hammer

Tweets: > The propaganda over Sri Lanka is ridiculous. US state propaganda outlet VOA, British mouthpiece BBC, and Indian media are blaming China for a supposed "debt trap" > > But in reality Sri Lanka owes more external debt to the US-dominated Asian Development Bank, Japan, and World Bank Earlier in the thread (only two tweets in it) he also talks about how media is trying to show the protests as pro-US when they are not: > [Derek J. Grossman] worked at the CIA, DIA, and NSA, and is at Pentagon think tank the RAND Corporation, and he is portraying the protests in Sri Lanka as an anti-China (pro-US) color revolution 🧐