Los Angeles city hall is completely overrun with rats. This is not âpost-apocalyptic LAâ or âzombie LAâ, itâs actual real-world LA.
I meanâŚ
http://file.scirp.org/Html/6-1400102_27414.htm
Pneumothorax as a predatory goal for the sabertooth cat (Smilodon fatalis)
Oh, I read this one. Pretty good! Put the Power Broker on my list, but man, better clear out a fuckinâ year to read it.
The âwriterâ in this makes the claim that âChina no longer needs Hollywoodâ. I think the bigger question would be whether Hollywood needs China, but I donât earn the big bucks, so what do I know.
For what itâs worth, the plot of Wandering Earth sounds as insipid as any Hollywood blockbuster.
Also, one of the top-line drop-down categories on the Forbes site is âBillionairesâ. Not my kind of site, but sooo 2019.
The possible viewing figures and potential earnings from China means itâs difficult to ignore. In a country that populous, you can end up with a massive audience even if you do make any old shit
I was surprised to read â⌠Hollywood can no longer rely on China.â Given the incredible limited quota on foreign films allowed into China, and the restricted amount China provides back to the producer from the Chinese state-owned distribution companies, I think itâs a stretch to say that Hollywood relies on China.
Sure, the relatively few films that make it in are able to pad their revenues a bit, but Hollywood as a whole I sure donât see relying on China.
Hollywood has been negotiating a new deal with China for more than a year (the 2012 memorandum expired in 2017), in hopes of raising the quota, increasing the percentage on revenue shares, and gaining more control (or at least transparency) with respect to distribution logistics such as release schedules and blackout dates.
https://www.chinalawblog.com/2018/06/china-film-quota-what-quota.html
I had posted this over in the Stately Citizen Journalism thread, partially in a sad followup to @Private_Prinnyâs disappointment to the mobile treatment of Disgaea (outside of the Switch treatment, of course), but feel perhaps itâs out of place there so moving it here.
I find this interesting, in that it does continue to support the fact that mobile phone and tablet gaming suits are not targeting me, but rather making so many apps that target monetization over gameplay (IMHO), which appears to be what their audience is fine with. 
Mobile video game playersâ mindset: They donât consider themselves âgamers,â survey finds
I still hold Apple as culpable in the destruction of their App Store and iOS as a viable gaming platform. Their Game Center fiasco, lack of dev support for enabling cloud saves and iOS device syncing, eliminating the affiliate commission program for the App Store to completely to dry up third party editorial review sites so the revenue goes to Apple as game publishers pay for prominent placement on App Store search results, and customers are at the mercy of Appleâs Search Ad business (Apple looking at $2 billion from Search Ad business alone by 2020). Apple still provides affiliate commissions for movies, TV shows, music, and books, I guess Apple considers those âpremiumâ quality content worthy of reviews and recommendations, but the App Store is for mass consumption by those swayed by their Search Ad sellout. 
I, myself, have in a large degree reluctantly shelved my initial naive enthusiasm for my smartphone as a portable gaming powerhouse, and have moved on to the Nintendo Switch as a better match for me (despite having my iPhone readily available). Yes, Iâll try Diablo: Immortal when it comes out, but Iâll not be surprised if itâs a blend of the Chinese devâs previous monetization structure and Activision-Blizzardâs King studio Candy Crush monetization ⌠I expect to continue to look to the Switch for portable Diablo premium gaming.
You make a lot of good points here. I think Apple is going to (quietly) phase out new product development for consumers within the next few years, to solely focus on ways to improve their current bedrock devices and continue to do all they can to make people rely on Search Ad. Thatâs the revenue model thatâs working for them. Theyâll eventually do a foldable ipad/phone/ipod, but not until they have the tech just right. And thatâs not really a ânewâ product for them.
As long as they keep making their updated devices sexy to consumers, theyâll sell millions of them, and devs will keep developing for them, and Search Ad will essentially print Apple money. If it became necessary, Apple could start selling their devices at-cost, to create a bigger and bigger audience pool to ensure they remain the biggest market in town for devs (similar to how magazines give away subscriptions to boost their circulation numbers for advertisers). Android will never be able to compete because too many manufacturers build their phones, and theyâll never collude to jointly lower the prices. If Microsoft really wanted to have a go at Apple in tablets, they could try, but they seem happy with holding the business-niche of tablets. And neither of those represent closed systems in the same way that Apple is.
All of the decisions Apple has made about apps and gaming have been in an effort to further close their ecosystem to outside influences and force a reliance on their Search Ad. And they can do it with games easily because the devs have no united systemic infrastructure in place to challenge Appleâs tightly controlled distribution model (if it can even be called that).
Apple wonât take away affiliate commissions for other media because those other media have too much industry infrastructure behind them. If Sony decides it doesnât like how Apple is treating their content/fans/artists, it can pull its music and release it via other distribution channels. Or have you buy it all direct from Sony. Itâs not like the mp3s wonât play in itunes. In fact, I wouldnât be surprised to see this start happening anywayâitâs whatâs already happening in TV media, as Disney/Marvel/Star Wars creates its own channel and removes its content from the places itâs been. CBS has its own (pitiful) premium channel. Others will do the same. Eventually, it could spread to music too.
You wrote, âit does continue to support the fact that mobile phone and tablet gaming suits are not targeting meâ, and youâre right, theyâre arenât targeting us. Apple doesnât care about games or gamers. Not because they dislike us but because they donât have to care. They sell devices and ad space; the devs sell the games in the very specific manner that Apple has created for them to do so. And the devs have realized that the money isnât with gamers, itâs with the wider audience, who like to play mindless, disposable crap that lights up and makes cute noises while taking their money a tiny bit at a time. Given everything we know about todayâs culture, I donât know why this keeps surprising/disappointing me/us.
The most surprising thing in the first article you linked to is that only 55% of American smartphone owners play mobile games to pass the time. The article stated this like it was huge; I feel like itâs low. If Iâd had to guess that number ahead of time, Iâd have put it at 75-80%. But as a lifelong gamer, I must admit that Iâm maybe biased.
Other things I must admit to myself:
âI need to follow the Stately Citizen Journalism thread (I never have)
âI will probably need to invest in a blasted Switch soon
âI donât need to upgrade my ipad because there will be increasingly fewer things I care about using it for.
The list is literally unbelievable.
In 1993, when a United Nations truth commission found that 95 percent of the acts of violence that had taken place in El Salvador since 1980 had been committed by Abramsâs friends in the Salvadoran government, he called what he and his colleagues in the Reagan administration had done a âfabulous achievement.â
Iâm only halfway through part 1 of this, but so far itâs amazing:
What.
rite.