marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)
Updated 10-20-2018: added third section (Reasoning).

In this age of Creative Commons and other open source licenses I guess it's about time I mention who can and cannot use my work and how much of it, where, when and how it can be used.

Background ) Rules ) Reasoning )
marahmarie: clapping back at L'Orange (Madame Speaker)

Pelosi asks Congress to terminate the false national emergency which Trumpelstiltskin didn't need to "do", by his own admission.

marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)

In an article with the slightly infuriating lede on of how JS "hits back", his lawyers are quoted as saying (emphasis my own):

“One of these purported suspects was Jussie’s personal trainer who he hired to ready him physically for a music video[...] “It is impossible to believe that this person could have played a role in the crime against Jussie or would falsely claim Jussie’s complicity.”

So wait. His lawyers are saying 1) this person (who's already been taken in and questioned along with an alleged accomplice - his brother; ultimately neither was charged) couldn't possibly have done it because uh, he knows JS. So through his lawyers JS has basically communicated, "Nah, not this guy, he didn't do it." Which is fine and well - but then, what about the first part of the lawyer's statement?

[...] Jussie Smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that the perpetrators are individuals he is familiar with[...] “He has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack.”

You can't have it both ways: First the lawyers say these are the alleged perpetrators and because they're known to him, this is so angering, then they say, "Oh, but no way one of them could be involved because he knows JS (though they just said they *both* know him, so!) and no way this one'd make up a false story on JS making up this story, either."

Huh, what? If I was a good listener, which I may or may not be, I might come to the conclusion that what his lawyers are trying to say is: "We think the police got the wrong guys, especially because this one guy is this great dude who was working with him on his new music video, so Jussie doesn't think this could possibly be them". So why couldn't they just say that, then?

The names of the brothers have been out as suspects for I don't know how long now - days? A week? So why couldn't JS speak up sooner to say, "I don't think this was them" if that's how he really feels/what he really thinks?

marahmarie: for dummies (How To Even)

Found via Network: Flickr will soon start deleting photos — and massive chunks of internet history:

The company, which has been financially troubled for some time and was sold by Yahoo to photo-hosting service SmugMug in April 2018, will discontinue its free terabyte of storage for all users and started deleting files from accounts that exceed the new cap of 1,000 photos[*], starting March 12 (the deadline has been extended following outcry from users).

I never got into Flickr so don't have photos or images to fear losing. I did go through the Great Photobucket Purge of, uh *checks Archives* 2017, though. I wrote a bunch of stuff about that.

The most useful post under that tag for the current Flickr situation - if you ignore the first three quarters of it, as it's entirely PB-centric - might be this one, where I advise (cautiously: I have not one but something like three as-yet unpublished Suggestions in with site management) using Dreamwidth's image-hosting services, or else signing up for free with (which is my current solution; last I checked, I was getting something like 3GB of image space for free each year; no videos allowed).

*"Photos"? Are non-photographic images barred from being hosted on Flickr? If Flickr's only deleting "photos", does that mean you can keep up to one terabyte of non-photographic images with them, still? I am confused!

marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)

1. Do you make up a dinner plan for the coming week?

My appetite is such I often won't know what I want for dinner more than a few minutes ahead of falling down from hunger, which requires keeping at least several days worth of food on hand, or else making some meal I ultimately wouldn't feel like eating.

The only thing that remotely resembles a dinner plan for me, therefore, are cravings. Say I crave oyster stew (which in fact I've been craving for days now). As long as I can afford the ingredients they'll all land in the cart the next time I go shopping without being added to the list. Other than cravings, there's no plan, just foods I think I might feel like eating over the next few days, which I usually buy no more than 3-4 of at a time (as the fridge is kind of small).

2. Do you make up a shopping list and stick to it when shopping?

Shopping lists are like rough drafts: I need them, but they won't resemble my final product unless Mars really happens to align with Venus. So there are always lists, but unless I'm so broke I have no choice but to stick to it (which sucks), there's some variation in what gets written down and what gets bought.

This tends toward buying what's not on the list as I think of it as I move through the store, and/or else getting killed drawn in by Publix BOGOs and the like. More rarely I can't afford what's on my list; on Yellow Liner Days the list is ~10 items long because money and all the "can't leave without" items (usually no more than 3-5) are highlighted in yellow to prevent that thing where I go broke.

3. What is one thing that you always buy, but never put down on a list?

Lactose-free milk and regular half and half* (these are perennially on the list, but if we're out I don't need them on the list, or even need a list, to know). Kitty litter and to a lesser extent, cat food, used to live on this perennial/unwritten list but Chewy does that now.

4. Is there anything that you always think you are out of and come home with it to discover you already have a year’s supply on hand?

No. More subliminally, pasta. Even more subliminally, red things in cans, usually tomato-based, because most of the time I don't stock up enough of them.

5. Do you get your groceries delivered?

No, speaking strictly of food.

I didn't tell y'all this, and you won't find it in the news because I was recently in a private study, but a famous big-box store is thinking of delivering anything you want to your door, including All The Food, for $99 a year. The predominant theme of the store is blue and there is an NDA. I'd *definitely* sign up because HELL YEAH - we spend more than that in gas just to get back and forth from the place.

Not speaking strictly of food, I get Cat Things auto-shipped now through Chewy, which means I never suddenly run out of anything Cat anymore, which has sort of revolutionized my free time, and freed me from the tyranny of always needing to go somewhere or get a ride somewhere to get something (because if the cats aren't out of something than we are, or both). I'm not *quite* over how amazing this is, though I've been getting auto-ships for roughly *checks Archives* four months now.

*Heavier forms of dairy like half and half and cream don't have as much lactose as milk. I'm not entirely off-the-chain lactose-intolerant, so I don't get too fussed about it.

Related: An at-best partial description of what's in the pantry, because [personal profile] conuly asked.

marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)

People don't live in islands; they live on them.

marahmarie: clapping back at L'Orange (Madame Speaker)

I have a question. At the 1:21:38ish mark, Madame Speaker takes her mysterious sheath of papers up again for the nth time, only now you see what looks like black scribbles through the back of the last page. I thought perhaps she was studying her own doodles on live TV when it hit me, "No wait, that's Trump's signature".

The Twitterverse seems to agree.

I've read that Trump gave a copy of his speech to Madame Speaker as he overtook the podium and that it was later "confirmed" she was reading it, so my question is: are SOTU speeches always signed by the president? Or did she just happen to have an executive order with that ridiculous Sharpie™ signature of his along the bottom - perhaps along with a copy of his SOTU speech?

My screen grab:

Nancy Pelosi appears to be holding a paper with Trump's signature on it during 2019 SOTU

Video showing paper with what appears to be his signature starting at 1:21:38 mark:

Oooh, it's a 2-for-1: Madame Speaker LITERALLY claps back at Trump

The most fun I had during this SOTU - the second-longest in history (he beat his own record, only surpassed by Clinton's SOTU in 2000) was watching Madame Speaker's face (and cuddling Bowie, who expressed his approval of Madame Speaker by going belly up in his "victory stretch", arms out wide. He fell asleep like that for another hour).

She has the most subtle, diplomatic way of shaking her head "No" almost continually for hours and knows how to call L'Orange out on his hypocrisy by literally clapping back at him.

Video of Madame Speaker's clapback starting at 0:59 mark:

Thanks to that moment I have a(nother) Madame Speaker user icon - whee.

If you watch this SOTU at all watch it for Madame Speaker, as L'Orange does nothing but strut around like an oversized penguin staring at planes in the sky while making his most menacing fish-mouths and scary Clint Eastwood squints to show us he's SERIEUZ YO and lies like a rug while upright.

CNN fact-checked him and he got like maybe two and a half things right and the world stopped turning for a second (also recounted in the CNN article) because he's finally told the truth ever, AT ALL, much less during SOTU. Won't happen again, I'm sure.


marahmarie: (M In M Forever) (Default)
MM Writes