News Robot Dreams Meet Dog and Robot and Love Them Both in Robot Dreams Trailer A dog and a robot maybe hold hands and we are emotionally unprepared. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share The Oscar-nominated animated feature Robot Dreams is finally heading to U.S. theaters so you and I can watch and cry our eyes out. The Pablo Berger-written and directed film premiered last year at Cannes‚ and since then has garnered rave reviews and also the Annie Award for Best Independent Feature. This latest trailer focuses on the lighter side of Dog and Robot’s relationship‚ when the two grow feelings for each other (and maybe… start holding hands&;#63;&;#33;) while exploring their version of New York City. Things‚ however‚ take a sad turn. The expanded synopsis of the movie below teases how: A tender‚ affecting tale of friendship‚ the animated Robot Dreams—adapted from the graphic novel of the same name by Sara Varon—is set in a 1980s NYC populated solely by pigs‚ birds‚ cats‚ and other animal clans. Yet Dog leads a lonely existence‚ eating TV dinners in his East Village walkup. When he sees an infomercial for a robot-building kit‚ he seizes the chance for the perfect city buddy: Dog and Robot eat hot dogs together on 5th Avenue‚ roller skate in Central Park‚ venture to Coney Island—to the groove of their song‚ Earth‚ Wind &; Fire’s “September.” But when Robot gets stranded at the beach‚ Dog is helpless to rescue him; and‚ as the seasons change‚ they both endure a separation that will change them forever. Will the ending be sad&;#63; Bittersweet&;#63; Happy&;#63; I’m still in the dark about that‚ but if Guillermo del Toro describes the film as “beautiful‚ unexpected‚ and tender‚” it will be a worthy watch. The U.S. theatrical premiere of Robot Dreams will happen on May 31‚ 2024‚ at Film Forum. Check out the latest trailer below. [end-mark] The post Meet Dog and Robot and Love Them Both in &;lt;i&;gt;Robot Dreams&;lt;/i&;gt; Trailer appeared first on Reactor.

Movies &; TV Babylon 5 Babylon 5 Rewatch: “Infection” Sinclair ducks a reporter and Garibaldi investigates a mysterious death… By Keith R.A. DeCandido | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share “Infection”Written by J. Michael StraczynskiDirected by Richard ComptonSeason 1‚ Episode 4Production episode 101Original air date: February 16‚ 1994 It was the dawn of the third age… A reporter from Interstellar Network News (which‚ for some reason‚ is abbreviated ISN)‚ Mary Ann Cramer‚ has arrived on B5 in order to interview Sinclair‚ an interview he is ducking. It’s the second anniversary of B5 going live‚ and ISN wants to interview the guy in charge. Garibaldi is stuck running interference with her. Franklin is surprised to get a visit from his mentor‚ Dr. Vance Hendricks‚ who promises him a grand adventure like nothing he’s ever seen before‚ so that can’t be good. Meantime in the docking bay‚ a customs officer questions Hendricks’ partner‚ Nelson Drake‚ suspecting him of smuggling something. Drake eventually kills the customs officer due to the fact that he is smuggling something. Garibaldi investigates the death of the customs officer‚ the cause of which seems to be a simple heart attack‚ though Garibaldi still thinks it suspicious. Hendricks explains that he and Drake retrieved some artifacts from Ikarra VII. They were sponsored by Interplanetary Expeditions. What they found are thousands of years old‚ but in perfect shape—and are also organic‚ which is why Hendricks brought them to Franklin to examine. This may give them the breakthrough to create organic technology like what the Vorlons and Minbari have. Hendricks also lies and says that the items went through quarantine at their previous stop on the way to B5. While unpacking some items‚ one glows and hits Drake with a massive electric discharge‚ throwing him across the cabin into the bulkhead. Drake does not report this to anyone‚ nor do Franklin or Hendricks notice his bizarre subsequent behavior. Sinclair continues to duck Cramer. Garibaldi’s attempt to get her to talk to him results in her asking him probing questions about all the prior jobs he’s been fired from‚ at which point he‚ too‚ ducks her. Franklin goes to MedLab to find it darkened and a transformed Drake inside. The latter says‚ “Protect&;#33;” and fires a nasty ray-beam at Franklin. Hendricks says that it appears that one of the devices they found bonds to a person‚ enhancing them. He promises to do more research. He also says that Drake handled all the paperwork for getting them through customs. Drake kills two people in downbelow. The zappy thing gets more powerful with each shot‚ to the point that CinC can pick up the blasts on scanners. But his first confrontation with security ends with Drake blasting through a bulkhead and escaping. It’s quickly determined that the zappy thing needs time to recharge‚ but that time decreases with each shot‚ plus it gets more powerful each time. Hendricks and Franklin’s research reveals that the tech they found was constructed in order to create soldiers who would defend only “pure Ikarrans‚” basing its programming on ideology rather than science. The problem was that there was no such thing as a “pure Ikarran‚” and eventually the soldiers wiped out everyone‚ even the ones on their side. Sinclair lures Drake away from populated areas‚ and also taunts him‚ saying he failed‚ and finally gets him to access the host’s memories‚ as Drake has been to Ikarra VII as it is today: a dead world. The tech figures out that it failed and discorporates in a puff of illogic. Franklin found a device for cardiac stimulation in Drake’s things that matches two markings on the customs officer’s neck. If used on a healthy person‚ it would induce a heart attack. Drake is guilty of murder. Hendricks offers Franklin half the money he’ll get from IPX—which‚ he says‚ is a front for a bio-weapons developer—if he doesn’t turn him in. But Franklin called security before he confronted Hendricks. Later‚ two people from EarthDome show up to confiscate the bio-tech. Finally‚ Sinclair sits down with Cramer and speaks his mind—including why he thinks‚ despite the expense and the skepticism of many back on Earth—it’s vital that humanity continue to go out into space. Nothing’s the same anymore. Garibaldi calls Sinclair on his constant need to barge in and do all the rough missions his own self‚ making it clear that it’s not just because he’s the top-billed character but also because he still hasn’t figured out how to stop fighting in a war. Ivanova is God. When Cramer tries to barge her way into CinC during a crisis‚ Ivanova gets rid of her by standing in front of her and very calmly saying‚ “Don’t—you’re too young to experience that much pain.” Cramer immediately departs. The household god of frustration. Sinclair tells Garibaldi that he’s avoiding Cramer because the last time he gave an interview to a journalist and spoke his mind‚ he was transferred to a distant outpost. Garibaldi tells him that he shouldn’t fret—just speak his mind again‚ and worst case‚ he’s transferred out and Garibaldi gets his job. What’s the problem&;#63;&;#63;&;#63;&;#63;&;#63; Welcome aboard. Marshall Teague plays his first of three roles in the franchise‚ as Drake; he’ll return in the recurring role of Ta’Lon throughout seasons two to five‚ and again in Crusade’s “The Long Road” as Captain Daniels. Patricia Healy makes her first of two appearances as Cramer; she’ll be back in “By Any Means Necessary.” But the big guest is our first Robert Knepper moment of the B5 Rewatch‚ as I had totally forgotten that the late great David McCallum played Hendricks. McCallum is‚ of course‚ best known for his iconic role of Ilya Kuryakin in The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and his long-running final role as Dr. “Ducky” Mallard for the first two decades of NCIS. Trivial matters. This episode has the first mention of the possibly very dodgy Interplanetary Expeditions‚ which will be seen a bunch more again. This was the first episode written and produced once the show went to series‚ though it was never intended to be the first aired. Only four of the ten people listed in the opening credits appear in this episode. Bill Mumy and Caitlin Brown have yet to make their first appearances‚ despite being credited. The echoes of all of our conversations. “There’s one thing that every scientist on the planet agrees on: whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years‚ eventually our sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens‚ it won’t just take us—it’ll take Marilyn Monroe and Laozi and Einstein and Morobuto and Buddy Holly and Aristophanes‚ and all of this… all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars.” —Sinclair’s answer to Cramer’s interview question‚ and also the only worthwhile part of the episode. The name of the place is Babylon 5. “What’s the worst that could happen&;#63;” It’s never a good sign when an episode of B5 doesn’t have any of the three most interesting characters in it. Delenn‚ G’Kar‚ and Mollari are the heart and soul of this show‚ and that none of them appear in this episode is but one of a billion problems with it‚ the biggest of them being that it’s awful. Seriously‚ this script would make for one of the weaker episodes of Space: 1999 or Buck Rogers in the 25th Century or the original Battlestar Galactica or Gene Roddenberry’s Andromeda‚ much less the show that promised to be the vanguard of a new age of great SF TV. B5 got some great guest stars over its run‚ and I thought I remembered all the good ones‚ but I’d totally forgotten that David McCallum was ever on this show. It’s a testament to how truly dreadful this episode is that it made me forget that McCallum was in it. “Infection” is a tiresome collection of weak clich&;eacute;s‚ boring action‚ and tired tropes‚ from the mentor-gone-evil to the manly hero avoiding the plucky female journalist who just wants to ask him some questions to the laughable look of Drake after being transformed. It does have one redeeming feature‚ but the problem is‚ you have suffer through the entire crappy episode to get to it. Sinclair’s answer to Cramer’s question about whether humanity should continue to go into space or stay home where it’s safe and only has humans in it is brilliant (and quoted in “The echoes of all our conversations” above)‚ erudite‚ and‚ most of all‚ quite true. (I wish half the people he cited weren’t from twentieth-century Western civilization‚ but I also love that his list included the creators of both the Tao Te Ching and “Peggy Sue.”) Some might say that Garibaldi’s come-to-Jesus speech to Sinclair is a redeeming feature‚ too‚ but I’m not one of them. It’s a legitimate complaint from Garibaldi‚ and it certainly provides justification for Sinclair being at the forefront of the action all the time. But it feels too much like Straczynski came up with a Marvel No-Prize to explain why the guy at the top of the opening credits does all the cool actiony stuff‚ rather than an actual bit of characterization. Next week: “The Parliament of Dreams.”[end-mark] The post &;lt;i&;gt;Babylon 5&;lt;/i&;gt; Rewatch: “Infection” appeared first on Reactor.

The only two states that apportion Electoral College votes in presidential races by congressional district are poised to scrap what makes them unique.  In these systems‚ presidential candidates get one electoral vote for each congressional district they win in the state. Unlike in other states‚ the Democratic‚ Republican‚ and other party candidates could end up splitting a state’s electoral votes among them. The usually blue Maine and generally red Nebraska each had one battleground congressional district that would sometimes draw presidential candidates. But the Maine Legislature moved to give its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote—regardless of who carries the state.  Nebraska lawmakers are considering becoming like 48 other states with winner-take-all elections‚ meaning the candidate who captures the majority of the state’s popular vote takes all of the state’s electoral votes. Nebraska’s change—if adopted—would affect the 2024 presidential election‚ while the Maine change likely wouldn’t. Last week‚ Maine Democratic Gov. Janet Mills announced she would let a bill making Maine the 18th state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact become law without her signature after it narrowly passed the state Legislature.  Maine Joins National Popular Vote Compact https://t.co/e6tvfYRH6H via @democracynow— NationalPopularVote (@NatlPopularVote) April 21‚ 2024 Under the multistate compact‚ Maine agrees to give its four electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the national popular vote. The states that make up the compact thus far represent a combined 209 electoral votes. Those votes will only activate when the compact reaches the required 270 electoral votes needed to elect a president.  Meanwhile‚ Nebraska’s Republican Gov. Jim Pillen is considering calling a special session of the state Legislature‚ which already adjourned on April 18‚ to adopt a winner-take-all system for the state’s five electoral votes.  Pillen said he would only call a special session “when there is sufficient support in the Legislature to pass it.” Prominent conservative commentators such as Charlie Kirk and Mark Levin have supported the change in Nebraska. JUST IN—The Great One‚ Mark Levin‚ gets behind turning Nebraska into a winner-take-all electoral college state. The coalition is growing. Listen to @marklevinshow break down why this is critical ahead of November&;#63; pic.twitter.com/97PbsKAp3P— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 9‚ 2024 Maine enacted its rule to divide its electoral votes by congressional district ahead of the 1972 election. It took another 20 years for Nebraska to follow suit‚ which it did ahead of the 1992 election.  However‚ split votes have been rare. The first time Nebraska had a split came when Democrat Barack Obama won the swing Nebraska district in the Omaha area in the 2008 election‚ the first time since 1964 that a Democrat won an electoral vote in the state.  In 2016‚ Republican Donald Trump won Maine’s 2nd Congressional District‚ which includes most of the state outside of Portland or Augusta‚ netting one electoral vote from the state. He was the first Republican since 1988 to win a Maine electoral vote.  In 2020‚ Democrat Joe Biden captured Nebraska’s 3rd Congressional District and its electoral vote. The post These 2 States Are Poised to Scrap Fractured Electoral College System—in Different Ways appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sen. Lindsey Graham‚ R-S.C.‚ a leading neoconservative‚ is making the rounds on media touting his support for the $61 billion Ukraine aid bill. His rationale: It’s a loan. Crediting former President Donald Trump for the idea‚ Graham told “Fox News Sunday” host Shannon Bream that he supports the foreign aid package currently before Congress because it’s structured differently from a previous deal he opposed in February. “This aid package has a loan component to it‚” Graham said Sunday. “President Trump has created a loan component to this package that gives us leverage down the road.” But does it&;#63; Propaganda Alert: Lindsey Graham gives Trump credit for House passage of Ukraine aid‚ &;quot;Ukrainians are fighting like tigers. This aid package has a loan component to it and this would not have passed without Donald Trump.&;quot;*Trump has promised to end all aid to Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/hcEetO7iQP— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) April 21‚ 2024 What Graham fails to mention is the fine print. Of the $61 billion in the foreign aid package‚ only $9.5 billion comes in the form of a “forgivable loan” for the Ukrainian government‚ according to Heritage Action. (Heritage Action is the grassroots arm of The Heritage Foundation‚ which founded The Daily Signal in 2014). There’s another catch for the so-called loan: President Joe Biden has the power to cancel 50% of the total after this coming Nov. 15. And the remaining 50% may be canceled by the president after Jan. 1‚ 2026. The ‘loan’ for Ukraine is all smoke and mirrors. It allows the president to cancel up to 50% of funds owed after November 15‚ 2024‚ and all remaining funds owed after January 1‚ 2026. No bank would allow this. #AmericaLast pic.twitter.com/W8lKzGauJU— Rep. Scott Perry (@RepScottPerry) April 17‚ 2024 “This bill isn’t intended to come due‚” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts wrote for The Hill last week. “The ‘loan’ would be structured at 0% interest‚ would be waivable by President Biden‚ and would be financed with more U.S. debt. No one in Washington seriously plans to ask for the money back. And if they did‚ Ukraine could simply default on the loan.” Graham was one of 29 senators—26 of them Republicans—to oppose an earlier version of Biden’s supplemental spending request in February. At the time‚ Graham said: “Pulling the plug on Ukraine only invites further aggression in other areas of the world‚ particularly from China. However‚ as I have been consistently saying‚ we must deal with our border first. … The border must be addressed before we can move to other areas.” When senators vote on the $95 billion foreign aid package‚ they won’t consider any legislation related to the border crisis. That’s because House Speaker Mike Johnson‚ R-La.‚ opted not to include a separate border bill as part of the foreign aid legislation. Still‚ Graham has signaled he’ll support the package—even if the loan concept he endorsed in February is different from the one in the current legislation. “A loan on friendly terms allows America‚ who is deeply in debt‚ a chance to get our money back and changes the paradigm of how we help others‚” Graham said in February. In this case‚ no one expects the United States to be repaid. “The American people will never see this money again‚” Rep. Troy Nehls‚ R-Texas‚ said. Graham’s office did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. $60.84B to Ukraine&;#63; I’m not a no‚ but a HELL NO. The president can forgive 50% of this “loan” after November 15‚ 2024. The American people will never see this money again. pic.twitter.com/VLeilc5Il0— Congressman Troy E. Nehls (@RepTroyNehls) April 17‚ 2024 The post What Lindsey Graham Isn’t Telling You About US ‘Loan’ to Ukraine appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Alexandre De Moraes may have overplayed his hand while drafting and executing Brazil’s policies aimed at controlling speech on social platforms active in the country. According to reports out of Brazil‚ this is now making even those allies he effectively helped get elected – such as the sitting president’s environment – nervous. Moraes‚ president of the Superior Electoral Court and Supreme Federal Court justice‚ seemed fairly confident when he decided to escalate a public clash with X owner Elon Musk over court orders to ban a large number of accounts‚ including those of high profile figures. Moraes chose not to address the issue at hand – why X was supposed to comply to censor these people without being given any explanation‚ and while under a gag order‚ unable to reveal where the orders came from (it was from Moraes). Instead‚ he went for launching an investigation into Musk and X under “digital militias” law. But all this has achieved‚ it seems‚ is bring an unprecedented amount of attention to Moraes and his role in spearheading online censorship in Brazil‚ which has been ongoing for some years. Influential Brazilian “newspaper of record” Folha de S&;atilde;o Paulo now writes that Moraes is increasingly criticized not only by the opposition‚ but also members of the government of President Lula and Congress members normally aligned with both. Apparently‚ in addition to the executive and legislative branches of power‚ Moraes’ decisions are on an increasingly shaky ground even within “his own” Supreme Court. For now‚ these are just opinions expressed “behind the scenes” and in “private conversations‚ but the very fact that the newspaper – described by some observers “as the New York Times of Brazil” – decided to look into the matter of the power‚ role and support that Moraes enjoys‚ could be indicative of which way the wind is blowing. The criticism seems to boil down to various officials either wanting some of the inflammatory and controversial measures to be outright revoked‚ while others are in favor of‚ essentially‚ damage control – taking some (real or perceived) steps back‚ to calm current tensions. The post Brazil’s Chief Censor Faces Growing Criticism From Even Congress and Lula Government appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A US federal judge – who imposed draconian surveillance measures against a man charged and later convicted and paroled in connection with the January 6 events – is clearly unimpressed by the ruling of a US Court of Appeals‚ that recently overturned his decision. Senior District Judge Reggie Walton now wants the controversy officially revisited‚ so he scheduled a new hearing date for June 4 in a bid to make his original order for Daniel Goodwyn’s computer to be surveilled for “mis/disinformation” stick. Early in April‚ the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia announced that the order to monitor and “inspect” Goodwyn’s computer for “mis/disinformation” was the result of the district court having “plainly erred.” Goodwyn (described in reports as a citizen journalist) was convicted on a single trespassing misdemeanor count based on him spending 36 seconds inside the Capitol on the day. Goodwyn was subsequently arrested and sentenced by Judge Walton to two months in prison‚ but that was not all – his computer was to be “monitored and inspected” during his parole. This last bit of the ruling was too much for the circuit court‚ which overturned it earlier in the month. The ruling said Walton “plainly erred in imposing the computer-monitoring condition without considering whether it was ‘reasonably related’ to the relevant sentencing factors and involved ‘no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary’ to achieve the purposes behind sentencing.” But now Walton is trying to once again impose surveillance of Goodwyn’s computer‚ ordering him to “show cause” as to why that should not be happening. This might even be seen as testing the presumption of innocence‚ but Goodwyn’s attorney Carol Stewart is happy to point out that‚ “the First (free speech) and Fourth (unwarranted searches protections) Amendments have not been wiped out of the US Constitution yet” – calling for the computer monitoring measure to be dismissed once and for all as unconstitutional‚ and irrelevant. “The application of computer monitoring conditions to conduct invasive searches is covered extensively by case law‚ where the computer had to be used for the crime. And use could not have just been incidental or casual. The computer had to be integral to the crime‚” said Stewart. And it turns out – just as Judge Walton‚ who threw the book at Goodwyn not only for his participation in the January 6 events but it seems (at least where the “computer surveillance” measure is concerned) mostly for him talking to Tucker Carlson‚ then of Fox News – the judge himself has his own history of appearing in the media and making what can be viewed as controversial statements. On CNN‚ that is‚ as a vocal and controversial critic of Donald Trump. The post Judge Challenges Appeals Court Over Computer Monitoring Ban in January 6 Parole appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. What is best known as the “politicization of institutions” in authoritarian societies is these days making a creeping but steady progress in some countries/blocs one would not have suspected of such things until relatively recently. Here we have Europol (EU’s law enforcement agency) and the supposedly “divested” from the EU shenanigans via Brexit UK – but is it really&;#63; – and that country’s National Crime Agency (NCA)‚ teaming up to attack Meta for dozens and dozens of reasonable reasons‚ but for the one thing the company is apparently trying to do right. Read the joint declaration here. And that’s implementing in its products end-to-end encryption (E2EE)‚ the very‚ necessary‚ irreplaceable software backbone of a safe and secure internet for everybody. Yet that is what many governments‚ and here we see the EU via Europol‚ and the UK‚ keep attempting to damage. Related: But mass surveillance is a hard sell‚ so the established pitch is to link the global and overall internet problem‚ to that of the safety of children online‚ and justify it that way. The Europol executive director‚ Catherine De Bolle‚ compared E2EE to “sending your child into a room full of strangers and locking the door.” And yet‚ the technological truth and reality of the situation is that undermining E2EE is akin to giving the key to your front door and access to everybody in it‚ children included‚ to somebody you “trust” (say‚ governments and organizations who like you to take their trustworthiness for granted). But once a copy of that key is out‚ it can be obtained and used by anybody out there to get into your house at any time‚ for any reason. That includes governments and organizations you don’t trust or like‚ straight-up criminals – and anything active on the web in between. None of this seems to make any difference to those pushing for encryption backdoors (i.e.‚ giving up the keys to your online life). Privacy advocates and experts have long warned that the real reason is not these entities “thinking of the children” – but trying to facilitate mass surveillance. And they’re not giving up on trying to put a negative spin on encryption‚ and a positive one on their own dubious to say the least efforts. According to NCA chief Graeme Biggar‚ Meta and its properties – Facebook‚ and Instagram – have “consciously blinded themselves” to serious crimes. The post Privacy Under Siege: Europol and the UK Crime Agency Target Encryption‚ Call For Backdoors appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

150 Protesters Arrested at NYU 'Liberated Zone'

Texas Judge Dismisses Charges Against Rioting Illegal Aliens

Mistrial for Arizona Rancher Who Shot Illegal Migrant