Ronald.phillips

If the Wu-Tang produced it in '23 instead of '93, they'd have called it D.R.E.A.M. — because data rules everything around me. Where once our society brokered power based on strength of our arms and purse strings, the modern world is driven by data empowering algorithms to sort, silo and sell us out. These black box oracles of imperious and imperceptible decision-making deign who gets home loans, who gets bail, who finds love and who gets their kids taken from them by the state. 

In their new book, How Data Happened: A History from the Age of Reason to the Age of Algorithms, which builds off their existing curriculum, Columbia University Professors Chris Wiggins and Matthew L Jones examine how data is curated into actionable information and used to shape everything from our political views and social mores to our military responses and economic activities. In the excerpt below, Wiggins and Jones look at the work of mathematician John McCarthy, the junior Dartmouth professor who single-handedly coined the term "artificial intelligence"... as part of his ploy to secure summer research funding.

WW Norton

Excerpted from How Data Happened: A History from the Age of Reason to the Age of Algorithms by Chris Wiggins and Matthew L Jones. Published by WW Norton. Copyright © 2023 by Chris Wiggins and Matthew L Jones. All rights reserved.

---

Confecting “Artificial Intelligence”

A passionate advocate of symbolic approaches, the mathematician John McCarthy is often credited with inventing the term “artificial intelligence,” including by himself: “I invented the term artificial intelligence,” he explained, “when we were trying to get money for a summer study” to aim at “the long term goal of achieving human level intelligence.” The “summer study” in question was titled “The Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence,” and the funding requested was from the Rockefeller Foundation. At the time a junior professor of mathematics at Dartmouth, McCarthy was aided in his pitch to Rockefeller by his former mentor Claude Shannon. As McCarthy describes the term’s positioning, “Shannon thought that artificial intelligence was too flashy a term and might attract unfavorable notice.” However, McCarthy wanted to avoid overlap with the existing field of “automata studies” (including “nerve nets” and Turing machines) and took a stand to declare a new field. “So I decided not to fly any false flags anymore.” The ambition was enormous; the 1955 proposal claimed “every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it.” McCarthy ended up with more brain modelers than axiomatic mathematicians of the sort he wanted at the 1956 meeting, which came to be known as the Dartmouth Workshop. The event saw the coming together of diverse, often contradictory efforts to make digital computers perform tasks considered intelligent, yet as historian of artificial intelligence Jonnie Penn argues, the absence of psychological expertise at the workshop meant that the account of intelligence was “informed primarily by a set of specialists working outside the human sciences.” Each participant saw the roots of their enterprise differently. McCarthy reminisced, “anybody who was there was pretty stubborn about pursuing the ideas that he had before he came, nor was there, as far as I could see, any real exchange of ideas.”

Like Turing’s 1950 paper, the 1955 proposal for a summer workshop in artificial intelligence seems in retrospect incredibly prescient. The seven problems that McCarthy, Shannon, and their collaborators proposed to study became major pillars of computer science and the field of artificial intelligence:

1. “Automatic Computers” (programming languages)

2. “How Can a Computer be Programmed to Use a Language” (natural language processing)

3. “Neuron Nets” (neural nets and deep learning)

4. “Theory of the Size of a Calculation” (computational complexity)

5. “Self-​improvement” (machine learning)

6. “Abstractions” (feature engineering)

7. “Randomness and Creativity” (Monte Carlo methods including stochastic learning).

The term “artificial intelligence,” in 1955, was an aspiration rather than a commitment to one method. AI, in this broad sense, involved both discovering what comprises human intelligence by attempting to create machine intelligence as well as a less philosophically fraught effort simply to get computers to perform difficult activities a human might attempt.

Only a few of these aspirations fueled the efforts that, in current usage, became synonymous with artificial intelligence: the idea that machines can learn from data. Among computer scientists, learning from data would be de-​emphasized for generations.

Most of the first half century of artificial intelligence focused on combining logic with knowledge hard-​coded into machines. Data collected from everyday activities was hardly the focus; it paled in prestige next to logic. In the last five years or so, artificial intelligence and machine learning have begun to be used synonymously; it’s a powerful thought-​exercise to remember that it didn’t have to be this way. For the first several decades in the life of artificial intelligence, learning from data seemed to be the wrong approach, a nonscientific approach, used by those who weren’t willing “to just program” the knowledge into the computer. Before data reigned, rules did.

For all their enthusiasm, most participants at the Dartmouth workshop brought few concrete results with them. One group was different. A team from the RAND Corporation, led by Herbert Simon, had brought the goods, in the form of an automated theorem prover. This algorithm could produce proofs of basic arithmetical and logical theorems. But math was just a test case for them. As historian Hunter Heyck has stressed, that group started less from computing or mathematics than from the study of how to understand large bureaucratic organizations and the psychology of the people solving problems within them. For Simon and Newell, human brains and computers were problem solvers of the same genus.

Our position is that the appropriate way to describe a piece of problem-​solving behavior is in terms of a program: a specification of what the organism will do under varying environmental circumstances in terms of certain elementary information processes it is capable of performing... ​Digital computers come into the picture only because they can, by appropriate programming, be induced to execute the same sequences of information processes that humans execute when they are solving problems. Hence, as we shall see, these programs describe both human and machine problem solving at the level of information processes.

Though they provided many of the first major successes in early artificial intelligence, Simon and Newell focused on a practical investigation of the organization of humans. They were interested in human problem-​solving that mixed what Jonnie Penn calls a “composite of early twentieth century British symbolic logic and the American administrative logic of a hyper-​rationalized organization.” Before adopting the moniker of AI, they positioned their work as the study of “information processing systems” comprising humans and machines alike, that drew on the best understanding of human reasoning of the time.

Simon and his collaborators were deeply involved in debates about the nature of human beings as reasoning animals. Simon later received the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on the limitations of human rationality. He was concerned, alongside a bevy of postwar intellectuals, with rebutting the notion that human psychology should be understood as animal-​like reaction to positive and negative stimuli. Like others, he rejected a behaviorist vision of the human as driven by reflexes, almost automatically, and that learning primarily concerned the accumulation of facts acquired through such experience. Great human capacities, like speaking a natural language or doing advanced mathematics, never could emerge only from experience—​they required far more. To focus only on data was to misunderstand human spontaneity and intelligence. This generation of intellectuals, central to the development of cognitive science, stressed abstraction and creativity over the analysis of data, sensory or otherwise. Historian Jamie Cohen-​Cole explains, “Learning was not so much a process of acquiring facts about the world as of developing a skill or acquiring proficiency with a conceptual tool that could then be deployed creatively.” This emphasis on the conceptual was central to Simon and Newell’s Logic Theorist program, which didn’t just grind through logical processes, but deployed human-​like “heuristics” to accelerate the search for the means to achieve ends. Scholars such as George Pólya investigating how mathematicians solved problems had stressed the creativity involved in using heuristics to solve math problems. So mathematics wasn’t drudgery — ​it wasn’t like doing lots and lots of long division or of reducing large amounts of data. It was creative activity — ​and, in the eyes of its makers, a bulwark against totalitarian visions of human beings, whether from the left or the right. (And so, too, was life in a bureaucratic organization — ​it need not be drudgery in this picture — ​it could be a place for creativity. Just don’t tell that to its employees.)

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/hitting-the-books-how-data-happened-wiggins-jones-ww-norton-143036972.html?src=rss

This post contains major spoilers for "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3."

"Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" is a break-up movie.

When we saw them in "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame," our titular group of intergalactic heroes were put through the wringer. In between writer/director James Gunn's two ensemble films, the Russo Brothers made their own creative decisions with the characters (including some that Gunn has expressed his personal disagreement with). Tragically, in "Infinity War," the deadliest woman in the galaxy, Gamora (Zoe Saldaña), died at the hands of her father, the Mad Titan Thanos (Josh Brolin), drastically changing the dynamic of the group going into "Vol. 3," and especially with her slow-burn love interest, Peter Quill (Chris Pratt).

That version of Gamora, the one we've seen evolve from lone-wolf assassin into the caring sister who found redemption within her found family, is gone. But through time travel antics, an alternate universe Gamora, who has never gone on that self-improvement journey, lives on.

As audience members, we're primed to see fictional couples like Star-Lord and Gamora and their love prevail over any and all obstacles. After all, this is the same franchise where Doctor Strange and Christine find each other in every universe, right? But "Vol. 3" does something fresh and different when it comes to bookending the relationship between these two characters: Instead of taking the easy route and giving the audience exactly what they want, Gunn chooses what makes the most sense for his individual characters.

At the end of "Vol. 3," Peter and this new alternate Gamora go their separate ways, and the film is better for it.

Not The Same Gamora

As Mantis (Pom Klementieff) puts it, Peter has spent his life jumping from lilypad to lilypad, and eventually, it's going to be time to learn how to swim.

As loyal and brave as he is, Peter was taken from Earth at a young age during a traumatic moment in his life, and that comes with its own extreme emotional baggage. Before the Guardians, he was a man of non-committal hook-ups, thieving, and looking out for himself. The Gamora he knew, however, was the first person he ever felt a true romantic connection with, and although their relationship was challenging and their true feelings were often unspoken until close to her death, it was real, authentic, and transformative. The Guardians as a collective have bettered each other as individuals. His genuine love for Gamora challenged Peter to -- yes -- become a better man.

But as much as Peter's love is valid, it's ultimately unfair to project all of it on alternate Gamora. "Infinity War" and "Endgame" are too jam-packed as films to properly unpack Peter's grief, so Gunn is given the luxury of properly dealing with it in "Vol. 3." We're reintroduced to Peter Quill on Knowhere, numbing himself with alcohol and mumbling about Gamora in his sleep. Over the course of "Vol. 3," we watch Peter try to rekindle a romance with alternate Gamora, but in a very literal sense, this Gamora is not the same person Peter fell in love with. In the end, Peter's ultimate character arc is learning to accept what was lost, and starting anew.

The Impact Peter Leaves On Gamora Matters, Even If It's Not Romantic

But just because what Peter and Gamora have in "Vol. 3" is no longer romantic doesn't mean their relationship has lost all meaning. Alternate Gamora is plucked straight from 2014, right before she ever got the chance of crossing paths with Peter, Rocket (Bradley Cooper), Groot (Vin Diesel) and Drax (Dave Bautista). Though she's moved on from her life serving Thanos by becoming a Ravager, alternate Gamora's characterization is pointedly less empathetic. In heists, she doesn't act like a proper Guardian. Her objective is decidedly more important than the lives and well-being of others, and she'll threaten an innocent bystander if it means achieving her mission.

Gamora is still moving on from her old life, and is still in many ways Thanos' daughter. She initially joins the Guardians on their quest in this movie because of the money she'll get from helping them, and she can barely even comprehend why the Guardians are risking their own lives to save Rocket. Although he's suffering from heartbreak, her time with Peter in "Vol. 3" shows her exactly what has been missing from her life -- not through romantic gestures, but through his actions. Though she will never quite be the same woman they knew, ultimately, alternate Gamora walks away from the experience of fighting alongside the Guardians with a renewed faith and sense of unconditional love.

In that way, Peter is correct about alternate Gamora. The heroic and compassionate person he fell in love with is still there, even if the circumstances are different — and even if she can't love him back in quite the same way.

'I Bet We Were Fun'

It would be easy and gratifying for the audience to keep our gang of misfits together, but eventually the last act kicks in and they all go their own separate ways. Gunn prioritizes not what the audience would like to see, but rather what makes sense for his characters. Peter goes back to Earth. Alternate Gamora goes back to her new Ravager family. Mantis goes on a journey of self discovery. Nebula and Drax parent a whole new community of children. They're still a family, and there's a lot of love there, but sometimes, true love means accepting the reality of parting one day.

But "Vol. 3" doesn't take the easy path with its characters, especially not with Peter and Gamora's relationship, and that's why it largely succeeds with its emotional beats. Gunn made a film about letting go of past traumas and inhibitions to forge a new path. That both extends to Rocket's journey of accepting that life is worth living, and also to Star-Lord and Gamora finding happiness and fulfillment outside what they used to have together.

Before Gamora returns to her Ravager family, she takes one more look at Peter and says, "I bet we were fun." It's only natural to think about how things could have been. Maybe one day, on better terms, Peter and Gamora will cross paths again and try again. But the future of their story lives beyond what's written in the screenplay. Star-Lord will be back (as promised in the post-credits text), but Zoe Saldaña's portrayal of Gamora is decidedly over.

Read this next: The Most Powerful MCU Villains Ranked

The post Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Doesn't Take the Easy Path With Star-Lord and Gamora appeared first on /Film.

Shopping for Father's Day doesn't need to be a major hassle.

The lightweight version of Windows 11, known as Tiny11, can be run entirely off of a GPU's VRAM as demoed by NTDEV.

Windows 11 Without The Bloat "Tiny 11" Can Easily Run On A GPU's VRAM

Microsoft's Windows 11 OS has a lot of features and functions but hardly any real consumer would ever make use of all of these at once. Certain features will appear as bloat to users & a lightweight version of the OS exists in the form of Tiny11 which not only tones down the requirements making it run on older systems but also gets rid of the aforementioned bloat and clutter that is associated with the standard Windows 11 OS.

Recently, the lower size of the Tiny11 OS has made many users try to run it on various hardware. A few months ago, NTDEV managed to make the entire OS run and work on 384 MB of RAM while a different user managed to run it on just 200 MB of RAM.

2 of 9

While the OS was able to boot, the lower resources meant that you couldn't do much else at all besides looking at your achievement in the task manager. However, loading the OS off of the ram opened up room for more experiments and that's how NTDEV ended up using the GPU's VRAM for their next project.

Using the GpuRamDrive project, NTDEV was able to store and load the entire Tiny11 OS onto the VRAM of a GPU. The GPU used for this demo was the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop which has a total of 4 GB VRAM. It's really impressive because the OS was running smoothly but the entire pool of memory was in use alongside system ram. Although Tiny11 OS requires 2 GB memory, storing it up on the VRAM and loading it from the same location will put a burden on the VRAM pool.

If you want, you can use a higher-end GPU with a wider bus interface for better performance using the same tool. Modern GPUs come with over 10 GB of VRAM so that should be enough to do some light-weight tasks however running games will be bit difficult if you're running below 20 GB VRAM since you'd have to install them on the same available space as the OS on the VRAM.

With that said, the 4 GB of GPU VRAM is very fast compared to the RAM and storage devices since it operates at much faster bandwidths. As the primary storage device for the Tiny11 OS, the storage performance came out spectacular with sequential reads of up to 1960 MB/s & writes of up to 2497 MB/s. Once again, the OS was in use on the same pool so performance could've been better. This goes off to show that Tiny11 OS can be a good alternative for users who don't have the required PC hardware to run the standard OS but are accustomed to the new Windows 11 interface and certain features that it offers.

Fallout creator and The Outer Worlds director Tim Cain has talked about Bethesda’s direction with the iconic RPG games, praising what they brought to the Fallout series while continuing the legacy. In fact, Cain’s even mentioned how he’d love to see Bethesda listen to modders ahead of the Fallout 5 release date.

MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best RPG games, Best old games, Fallout 5 release date

People need to realize that the unions for white collar people like WGA or SIEU or NEA (public sector unions are why cops who kill the people they were supposed to serve & protect remain employed get pensions) is not the AFL-CIO or any other historical union fighting for the lives of the people who built the country’s industry and made it run, any more than the NRA are the Minutemen of 1775 New England.

First, go fuck yourself, you fucking scab. No, seriously - you don’t come to my blog and spout off about what workers deserve unions and decent pay and what ones don’t, like it’s your fucking decision. The intellectual labor that writers perform is just as real as any other work done on a film set - “all who labor by hand or brain” is the inherent logic of industrial unionism for a reason.

Second, writers aren’t asking to get paid more than once: residuals are deferred pay, you absolute moron. In Hollywood, whether it’s writers or actors or voice talent or whatever, you get a small fraction up front - it’s usually an ok check, depending on the union’s day rates and so forth, but you can’t make a living off stitching these together - and then most of your pay comes from monthly royalty checks that provide you with the income you need to live off when you’re between jobs.

The problem is that, historically in Hollywood, residuals have been structured with a very long “tail” - the payments start out relatively low and then get more generous over time as the show has more seasons and (presumably) goes into syndication. This doesn’t work with streaming’s new business model, where increasingly shows are getting 2-3 seasons max and streaming services have become increasingly quick to not just cancel shows but yank them off their servers in order to avoid paying residuals.

So what WGA writers are fighting for is a system that ensures writers (but also actors and other creative workers, because the unions pattern bargain) get a fair share of the show’s revenue, even if the show is only given 2-3 seasons.

Third, the U.S labor movement would not exist today if it wasn’t for white collar workers and public sector workers. About half of the U.S labor movement - 7 million workers - is public sector, and those workers are overwhelmingly women of color, mostly working as either teachers or postal workers. Likewise, about half the U.S labor movement is made up of white collar workers, and we’re graduate students and adjuncts and lab researchers, teachers and social workers, administrators and IT departments.

I’m both public sector and white collar, and I’m a member of an NEA union. I’m an adjunct professor who earns $6,000 a course and it’s my job to get working adults with jobs and families who’ve never gone to college or who’ve been out of higher ed for a decade to graduate with a bachelor’s or a master’s. If you don’t think that’s real work, you’re free to research and write all the lectures and powerpoints, deliver those in an entertaining and educational fashion, answer a flood of questions from students who need help navigating academia, and then grade all the midterms and finals and research papers.

The two primary features of James Gunn's multiple "Guardians of the Galaxy" projects are their quirkiness and their unabashed sentimentality. To assure the former, Gunn made his title team a group of weirdo outsiders who are all possessed of a playfully semi-ignorant, devil-may-care attitude that communicated a flip irreverence toward the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a series usually bogged down by overtly earnest mythmaking. On the other side of things, the outsider characters were, over the course of their multiple appearances, careful to tell each other about their respective trauma and issues with abusive fathers. The Guardians, then, didn't merely come together as a team, but emerged as a found family, holding each other for mutual warmth.

The Guardians movies, sadly, don't always strike a great balance between their flippant tone and their emotional leanings. The Guardians, as part of their job, kill enemy soldiers by the score and then are expected to sit and discuss how they rarely receive empathy.

This imbalance is especially sharp in "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3," a sprawling 150-minute denouement to the Guardian's story that ups the emotional stakes, but also expands the violence. The emotional beats occasionally hit, but they are largely undone by the sheer scale of destruction on camera. One might recall Zack Snyder's 2013 film "Man of Steel" in this regard. That film's final fight was between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (Michael Shannon) in a destructive conflagration that almost lays waste to downtown Metropolis. The film never stops to assess the destruction, and it appears that Superman feels no compunction about the mass death he is personally responsible for.

"Vol. 3" climaxes with the destruction of an entire planet. It doesn't pause to mourn.

Counter-Earth

The villain of "Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3" is a mad scientist called the High Evolutionary (Chukwudi Iwuji), a man obsessed with eugenics. For an unspecified amount of time, he has been building an exact replica of Earth out in the cosmos that he calls Counter-Earth. His plan is to use surgery and a high-tech evolution chamber to create a race of anthropomorphic animal people that will live on Counter-Earth in complete peace and prosperity. By the time the Guardians catch up with the High Evolutionary, Counter-Earth is already living through the 21st-century phase of its development.

At first, the animal people seem placid and friendly, and the Guardians are housed by a gentle bat woman who serves them drinks and lends them her family car. Immediately after, however, the Guardians drive into town and find that crime and drugs are rampant among the animal people and that society appears to be afflicted with as much violence and strife as many modern cities on Earth. When the High Evolutionary learns from the Guardians that his model society is failing, he resolves to incinerate the planet and start again.

The High Evolutionary flees in his creepy, medical spacecraft, just as Counter-Earth begins exploding from within. There is no talk of evacuating the planet, so it seems that the animal people who live on it -- presumably billions of them -- are all going to die.

One might think that, at the very least, Rocket Raccoon (Bradley Cooper), himself a result of the High Evolutionary's genetic tinkering, would pause to reflect on the mass death in front of him. Instead, the Guardians focus on apprehending the villain instead. Did I mention that billions of intelligent beings just died?

Piff. It's Only Morality.

One might have to do a little mental stretching to justify the Guardians' neglect. Perhaps the High Evolutionary's animal society was only a few weeks old and had been artificially accelerated in some way so that it would resemble modern Earth. That would mean the animal people hadn't organically formed their own Earth-like society but were mentally programmed to playact inside of one. And if they were merely remote-controlled meat bots without any free will, perhaps the Guardians can be forgiven for not being wholly attached to them -- although that doesn't make their murders any more ethical. It will be the small number of cute humanoid children they encounter later in the film that really matters.

Or perhaps director James Gunn wanted the villain to do something hideously villainous that would further warrant his comeuppance. Whatever the creative decision, worry not. The Guardians will get him.

But these are all conceptual calisthenics. The truth of the matter is the destruction of Counter-Earth forms a curious compassion black hole in the middle of "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3." In a film that is ostensibly about empathizing with all beings -- no matter how weird, wounded, or dejected -- it doesn't bother shed a single tear for a massive act of on-camera genocide. "Vol. 3" is a film that wants us to see a test animal as a victim worthy of saving, and then turns around and guns down multiple other said animals merely because they are "enemy combatants." Are the Guardians gentle and empathetic, or are they wisecracking, gun-toting badasses?

Gunn is eager to have his cake and eat it too. He wants sentimental gentleness, but also the dismissive attitude of a violent clown. Both elements work in turn, but they rarely work together.

Read this next: 11 Marvel Comics Villains We Really Want To See In The MCU

The post Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Has a Man of Steel Problem appeared first on /Film.

The very nature of being a working actor in the film and television industry means that you're bound to work with some of the same folks more often than not. As a result, reunions both expected and unexpected tend to occur. For an example of the former, check out the episode of "Psych" entitled "Dual Spires," which reunited several cast members from "Twin Peaks" long before "The Return" happened. For an example of the latter, take Elizabeth Olsen and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who appeared in 2014's "Godzilla" as husband and wife and then followed that up by appearing in 2015's "Avengers: Age of Ultron" as brother and sister.

In the latest season of the Star Wars series "The Mandalorian," which just wrapped up recently on Disney+, a reunion of former co-stars occurred that was wholly unplanned: Giancarlo Esposito and Charles Baker, both veterans of the groundbreaking AMC crime saga "Breaking Bad." While this may simply be a quirk of casting, their dual appearance carries a bit of irony: In both "Breaking Bad" and "The Mandalorian," Esposito and Baker's characters never meet each other.

From Different Sides Of The Street To Different Sides Of The Galaxy

To anyone mildly familiar with "Breaking Bad" or its prequel series "Better Call Saul," Giancarlo Esposito's character, Gus Fring, looms large. After all, not only is he one of the biggest meth distributors (and, eventually, manufacturers) in the American West, he's also the public figurehead of a surprisingly successful fried chicken chain, "Los Pollos Hermanos." Thanks to Esposito's riveting and intense performance, Gus has become known as one of the greatest TV villains of all time.

Despite Gus' reach, both literal and figurative, Baker's character of Skinny Pete never crossed paths with the "chicken man." In "Breaking Bad," Skinny Pete was a buddy of Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul), and was a lovable if slow-witted dude who could be counted on to step up to help Jesse out along with fellow pal Badger (Matt Jones), just as much as he and Badger could be counted on to goof things up. Despite Pete's shortcomings, he miraculously managed to not get whacked during the course of the series.

Ironically, in "The Mandalorian," Esposito and Baker's characters find themselves just as separated as they were on "Breaking Bad." Esposito's power-mad Moff Gideon is far too focused on reclaiming the Darksaber from Bo Katan (Katee Sackhoff) and defeating thorn-in-his-side Djn Djarin (Pedro Pascal) to battle a few Mandalorians who've stuck it out on the decimated planet of Mandalore, including Baker's "Survivor Scout." While the season 3 finale did not see these men cross paths, the possibility still exists for a proper "Breaking Bad" reunion in season 4.

Could Even More Breaking Bad Alumni Turn Up In The Mandalorian?

Perhaps Moff Gideon and Survivor Scout meeting up shouldn't be the true endgame for us "Breaking Bad" fans, however — maybe we should be hoping for even more alums of the show to turn up in a galaxy far, far away. How fitting would it be to see Bryan Cranston in an Imperial (or maybe even proto-First Order) uniform? Wouldn't Aaron Paul look good with a blaster in his hand? Perhaps the Mandalorians need the services of a gruff ex-pirate who looks like Jonathan Banks? Don't they have lawyers on Coruscant, and couldn't they use the services of one Bob Odenkirk? After all, Bill Burr, who played Kuby on "Breaking Bad," has already popped up in "The Mandalorian" as Migs Mayfield, so there's precedent for more "Breaking Bad" connections.

Whatever ends up happening, the galaxy seems to be the limit for "The Mandalorian." The third season finale was satisfying enough that the show could've easily ended there, yet we know there's a fourth season on its way. What shape that season could take is anyone's guess, especially when this past season included such tangents as a mini-conspiracy thriller that called back to George Lucas's first film. So, I'm not saying Djn and the Mandos will suddenly decide to raise funds to help Mandalore by cooking meth out of a space van, but I'm not not saying that, either.

Read this next: 11 Villain Origin Stories We Want Next From The Star Wars Universe

The post The Mandalorian Season 3 Had an Unexpected Breaking Bad Reunion appeared first on /Film.

Nintendo is once again on the warpath. After taking down the multiplayer mod created for the emulated PC version of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, the Japanese game company has now reportedly issued takedowns for Lockpick, the homebrew project that allows users to 'dump' their own digital keys from their Switch consoles and load them on emulators like Ryujinx and Yuzu for PC.

The news came from programmer Simon Aarons, who had created a fork of Lockpick. He also received a DMCA from Nintendo and shared it via Twitter. In the legal document, Nintendo argues that Lockpick allows users to circumvent the protective measures of the Switch console and facilitates copyright infringement by enabling pirated versions of Switch games to be played on modified consoles or other systems.

Ironically, as noted by many users, Lockpick is currently the only legal way to emulate Switch games, as it simply allows you to transfer your digital rights from the console to another platform, such as a PC. By taking down Lockpick, Nintendo may be forcing emulator users to actually look for pirated keys in the future.

this is ridiculous. this is quite literally the only legal way to emulate switch games, dumping your OWN keys

im now forced to obtain keys in illegal ways to emulate my own games thanks nintendo https://t.co/RWBcYJH8zE

— Mors (@MorsGames) May 5, 2023

While the Lockpick repository on GitHub is presently still available, it may be just a matter of time before GitHub complies with the takedown request.

Meanwhile, Nintendo's actions have already scared the developers of Skyline, an Android Switch emulator, into shutting down development to avoid any potential legal issues. The Skyline team posted the following message on their Discord server:

It is with great sadness that we bring you this news. Recently, Nintendo has issued a DMCA takedown notice against Lockpick RCM, which will likely come into effect on Monday. Lockpick is a core part of legally dumping keys from the Switch. They claim that it circumvents their copy protection (TPMs) and therefore violates their copyright. We find ourselves in a position where we are potentially violating their copyright by continuing to develop our project, Skyline, by dumping keys from our own Switches.

However, they won't remove the GitHub repository or builds, and the source code will be publicly shared. The team's next project will be a way to emulate Windows PC games on Android.

Lockpick had been around for years, inevitably prompting speculation on why exactly Nintendo took action at this precise time. The answer appears crystal clear, however: The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom leaked and became playable on PC emulators for several days now, way before the Switch release set for next week.

Does this mean the end for PC emulators, too? The Ryujinx team already responded with a resounding no on their Discord, while the Yuzu developers haven't issued an official statement yet. Needless to say, we'll keep a close eye on any future developments regarding this matter.

This article contains spoilers for "Star Trek: Picard."The bulk of the third season of "Star Trek: Picard" was devoted to the mystery of Jack Crusher (Ed Speleers), the son of Dr. Beverly Crusher (Gates McFadden) and Jean-Luc Picard (Patrick Stewart). At the beginning of the story, Jack was being hunted by a mysterious bounty hunter named Vadic (Amanda Plummer) who was willing to kill everyone on board the U.S.S. Titan-A in order to get him. While Jack was indeed a criminal, his crimes weren't entirely serious. Mostly, he and his mother merely smuggled medical supplies to planets overlooked by Federation doctrine. Why was Vadic so hellbent on apprehending him? 

By the end of the season, it was revealed that Jack had inherited from Picard a curious brain condition that manifested as superhuman powers. He could read thoughts, and he could project his consciousness into the bodies of others. This was, it seems, the result of a gene placed in Picard's brain by the Borg decades before. Using Jack's brain, a re-emerged Borg Queen (voice of Alice Krige) was able to infiltrate a fleet of Starfleet vessels and attack Earth. Worry not. A 105-year-old Picard, in command of a reconstructed Enterprise-D, charged to the rescue. The day was saved. 

In an epilogue, Jack was in a Starfleet uniform, having been fast-tracked through Starfleet Academy, and is already awaiting his first starship assignment. His first job will be on-board the Enterprise-G, which was merely the Titan-A rechristened. There was every reason to assume that the new Enterprise would be the subject of a new potential "Star Trek" spinoff series called "Star Trek: Legacy." 

Speleers himself admitted in a recent interview with Collider that nothing would make him happier than to see "Legacy" come to fruition. He's happy to make Jack Crusher his career. 

The Paramount+ Era

When CBS All Access (later Paramount+) launched in 2017, it dove headlong into "Star Trek" in a big way. A huge spate of Trek shows is currently operating on the network, each one taking place in a different place on the vast "Star Trek" timeline. "Star Trek: Discovery" took place a few years prior to the original series, "Star Trek: Lower Decks" took place shortly after the events of "Star Trek: Voyager," and the new season of "Picard" is set about 20 years thereafter. This time-spanning approach has allowed the various Trek showrunners to dig into every last chapter of Trek history for nostalgia, callbacks, and guest appearances. Shows like "Picard" have included any number of Trek actors returning to roles they abandoned years before. 

Speleers seems to know that "Star Trek" is a long-game career choice, and that he could very well be playing Jack Crusher for decades. This is a fate he is perfectly fine with. He said: 

"[Jack] just resonated with me. I joked to someone the other day: I was like, 'I just want to play Jack Crusher for the next 15 years and then retire.' I feel like there's so much storytelling to do with him."

Even if "Star Trek: Legacy" is not made, there's every reason Jack — or a descendant played by Speleers — could show up on any number of other Trek shows. 

Speleers also feels that Jack is too complicated a character to merely leave "mature." Like all of us aging coots, he didn't merely grow to a certain point and then stop. The character, one might find, is still young enough that further growth is required. Speleers wanted to continue his exploration. 

The Jack Of Tomorrow

The actor said:

"I just feel he's so complicated, and who knows what the future holds, but I think within that storytelling, I don't want it to be such a clean break as, 'Okay, he's dealt with everything now.' You still want that emotion because that's what we enjoy seeing. You want to see people that can ... You live everything they live, I suppose that's what you want."

It's worth noting that "Picard" featured a Marvel Cinematic Universe-like teaser for a show to come. While on board the U.S.S. Enterprise-G, the playful deity Q (John De Lancie), previously assumed to be dead, appears to Jack and lets him know that he will become the subject of Q's constant testing of humanity. Jack, less mature and diplomatic than Picard, will likely respond to Q's threats, tests, and gambols quite differently than his elderly father. If "Legacy" picks up where that stinger left off, then there is already plenty of adult exploration waiting for the character.

Also, what better way to assure career security than hooking into a long-running media franchise like "Star Trek?" Jack may be an interesting character worth exploring, but, more than that, he's a central figure in a vast, interconnected mythology with decades of history. Being a central part of the "Star Trek" universe isn't a bad place to be in.

Read this next: The Main Star Trek Captains Ranked Worst To Best

The post Star Trek: Picard's Ed Speleers Would Gladly Play Jack Crusher Until He Retires appeared first on /Film.

More than 40 years ago, Steven Spielberg gifted us with "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial," a film about growing pains, life-altering friendships, and the inevitability of loss. A sense of childhood nostalgia is inevitably associated with "E.T.," to the point that the film's theatrical version feels near-perfect, despite its flaws (which can be very easily overlooked). On the occasion of the film's 20th-anniversary release, however, Spielberg ended up making several tweaks to the movie's original cut.

These changes were initially meant to improve on the theatrical edition, as this iteration featured modern visual effects and added new scenes to provide a definitive viewing experience for fans of "E.T." Major changes included slight sprinklings of CGI to make E.T.'s movements more seamless and fluid, along with upgrades to the technological design of the spaceship and a more vibrant color scheme. However, over time, Spielberg regretted making some of these changes, especially when it came to a particular chase sequence that originally involved firearms, which Spielberg had switched out for walkie-talkies in the special edition. 

Speaking at Time's 100 Summit, Spielberg shared his views about censorship, saying that art, once put out into the world, should not be changed or revised to adapt to changing political climates or the creator's own evolving views. This led to him reflecting on the walkie-walkie tweak in the 20th-anniversary version of "E.T.," which he called " a mistake," musing that he "never should have done that." Spielberg had previously expressed similar regrets back in 2011 when he admitted that he was "overly sensitive" to parental concerns when the film was first released in 1982, which led him to make a host of changes — including digital enhancements and tweaks — 20 years later. In hindsight, Spielberg felt that it was the wrong call.

A Product Of Its Era

Once Steven Spielberg realized that he has made a mistake with the tweaks, he worked with Universal Pictures to release a two-film DVD set of "E.T." that would contain both cuts of the film. However, with time, the 2002 special edition cut became more difficult to find, with the theatrical cut becoming more widely available, especially around the time of its Blu-ray release. This might be the reason most folks remember the gun chase scene vividly, where the kids on BMXes are followed by menacing federal agents with loaded firearms, making the scene genuinely scarier than the tweaked version in the 2002 special edition.

Moreover, Spielberg elaborated his stance on the changes at Time's 100 Summit, stating that he should have "never messed with the archives of his own works," despite his evolving views over the years:

"'E.T.' is a product of its era. No film should be revised based on the lenses we now are, either voluntarily, or being forced to peer through. [...] 'E.T.' was a film that I was sensitive to the fact that the federal agents were approaching kids with firearms exposed and I thought I would change the guns into walkie-talkies. [...] I should have never messed with the archives of my own work, and I don't recommend anyone do that."

Spielberg went on to explain that all movies are markers of a creator's mindset at the time that they are made, where many aspects of a film's visual/narrative language are predominantly shaped by the trends of the times. Stories are molded through multiple lenses, including personal, cultural, and societal, and the result is an amalgamation of these factors, which always remain ever-changing. Per Spielberg, a work of art is sacrosanct, and should not be retroactively changed for any reason whatsoever.

Is Censorship Ever A Good Idea?

Steven Spielberg's comments about the gun edit in "E.T." opened a wider conversation about retroactive censorship as a whole, and he was asked about the latest edition rewrites in Roald Dahl's works, which removed language that was considered offensive. The director said:

"Nobody should ever take the chocolate out of Willy Wonka, and they shouldn't take the chocolate or the vanilla or any other flavor out of anything that's been written."

This issue does call for a more informed, nuanced conversation about censorship, and whether retroactive edits have any bearing on altering an author's intent or worldview at the time it was written. Many artists have complicated and problematic legacies, and while contemporary edits help create a more safer and inclusive space, it also risks the erasure of those very legacies.

For instance, if an artist's work contains offensive and problematic ideas, they should be remembered for exactly who they are, which opens the space for rightful criticisms levied at them and their body of work. When such works are airbrushed or tweaked later, these original intents and ideas, no matter how damaging or otherwise, are lost with time, altering our collective perception of the artist in question.

To round off his discussion about censorship, Spielberg concluded by saying that all kinds of art contribute to our history and cultural heritage and he does not believe in censorship within the context of retroactive revisionism. While the 2002 special cut might have had a longer version of the Halloween scene (with brighter colors!), the 1982 theatrical cut will always be the definitive version of "E.T."

Read this next: Every Steven Spielberg-Directed Horror Movie, Ranked

The post Steven Spielberg Wishes He Never Edited the Guns Out of E.T. appeared first on /Film.

It's getting weird out there. We almost seem to be living in a post-satire era, where fact and fiction feel so interchangeable that it can be hard to tell what's news and what's a well-written joke. When The Onion starts feeling more accurate than The New York Times, it's hard to tell which end is up, and media literacy is at an all-time low. That means satire is being read completely straight, and while that's nothing new (remember "Fight Club"?), it does feel pretty scary. Then again, one of the greatest satires of all time was originally taken at face value (and still is by some viewers) — that's right, I'm talking about Paul Verhoeven's "Starship Troopers." 

The 1997 sci-fi action flick was based on the very straight-faced novel of the same name by Robert Heinlein. Heinlein's novel depicts a fascist futuristic society where citizenship is inherent but something that must be earned, and non-citizens have very few rights. It's a militaristic, brutal novel that paints all of its characters as war heroes in a battle against an inhuman evil. Sure, they're fighting and killing giant alien bugs, but we never find out who started the war, exactly, and humanity has become hellbent on eradicating every alien insect in the whole universe, with other important aspects of life falling to the wayside. 

There's plenty of propaganda, but "Starship Troopers" shows us a world without art, without entertainment sans purpose, where everyone is expected to "do their part" or else. Its satire is so on-the-nose at times that it feels impossible to ignore, but some audiences still watched "Starship Troopers" and wanted to know where they could sign up. Verhoeven's satire was a little too good, it seems, because so many missed the point. 

Part Of A Propaganda Machine

"Starship Troopers" begins with our heroes as graduates just out of school, with Johnny Rico (Casper Van Dien) and his girlfriend Carmen (Denise Richards) checking their test scores in anticipation of military sign-ups. Carmen wants to be a pilot, while Rico is going to likely end up in the infantry due to his less-than-stellar grades. Rico's parents don't want him to sign up, knowing how likely it is that he'll be wounded or killed, but he wants to go to gain citizenship so he and Carmen can get married and have children. Things move swiftly, as Rico, Carmen, and their friend Carl Jenkins (Neil Patrick Harris) all sign up and get processed for military enrollment, and we get to see the world for what it really is. Almost all of the instructors and military personnel are missing limbs or eyes, and the officer that processes the new recruits is missing both legs and an arm! Military service is one of the only ways to get citizenship, but it comes at a very heavy cost. 

The recruits don't seem to mind or notice, despite the fact that Rico's parents beg him not to join. They've been fed anti-bug, pro-military propaganda about the "failures of democracy" their entire lives and are jazzed to sign up for almost guaranteed mutilation and death. It seems impossible to believe, but it's happened throughout our own history. (In fact, there's a similar, though less rowdy scene, in the Academy Award-winning "All Quiet on the Western Front.") From its earliest moments, Paul Verhoeven's film is pointing out how ridiculous this kind of warmongering is, even if the characters are completely invested and unaware. 

Taking It All At Face Value

The problem with "Starship Troopers" presenting its satire with such a straight face is that people totally missed the point. Even esteemed critic Roger Ebert didn't grasp the genius of what Paul Verhoeven was doing, mentioning that adapting Heinlein's novel faithfully was "slight satire," and giving the movie only two stars. It's strange now, because the satire feels about as subtle as a sledgehammer, but this was before everyone had the internet and access to The Onion, so maybe people just weren't used to this kind of sharp sarcasm. Then again, Verhoeven's movies have always been seriously satirical, and people have misunderstood them all. There are police officers who love "RoboCop," not understanding that it's a condemnation of police violence and militarized law enforcement, and "Starship Troopers" got taken at the same face value. 

Verhoeven's intent was anti-fascist, but somehow it mostly went over people's heads. As he told The Guardian in January 2018, he modeled the uniforms and logos after Nazi regalia, and went for their distinct iconography:

"I borrowed from 'Triumph of the Will' in the parody propaganda reel that opens the film, too. I was using [Leni] Riefenstahl to point out, or so I thought, that these heroes and heroines were straight out of Nazi propaganda. No one saw it at the time." 

I would say that those uniforms are too obvious to ignore, but people also didn't make the connection that the Stormtroopers in "Star Wars" are named after the original paramilitary wing of the Nazi party, the Sturmabteilung, so anything is possible.

Are You Doing Your Part?

"Starship Troopers," on a surface level, is a bombastic and ridiculously violent war film with enemies even easier to hate than Nazis, which is probably why kids and teens absolutely loved it. Too young and inexperienced to see the satire for what it was, many kids who rented the movie shortly after its release became obsessed, and "the only good bug is a dead bug!" would occasionally ring out on the school playground. It took me years to finally watch the film, convinced it was simple violence for violence's sake, and even then I wasn't sure if Paul Verhoeven was a satirical genius or not until the movie's final scene, which should make it clear for any audience that the humans are not heroes. 

After a horrific battle with mass casualties on both sides, the troopers manage to catch a "brain bug," sort of the queen of the hive. Jenkins is able to read its thoughts with his psychic powers, and he yells in excitement, "It's afraid!" Everyone cheers as the pitiable creature trembles. Yes, the bugs bombed Rio de Janeiro, but it was likely in retaliation for something the humans did, and there's no real telling who started the war in the first place. The joyous "it's afraid" is the nail in the coffin for reading "Starship Troopers" at face value, the moment where Verhoeven declares that the whole thing has been deeply satirical and if you haven't figured it out, you weren't paying attention.

Verhoeven's other films have been taken similarly seriously, from "Robocop" to "Benedetta," which is a real shame because he's one of our greatest living satirists. "Starship Troopers" was clearly ahead of its time, but hopefully people can appreciate it now for its satirical genius.

Read this next: Every Paul Verhoeven Movie Ranked From Worst To Best

The post The Vicious Satire of Starship Troopers Was Too Smart For Its Own Good appeared first on /Film.

Pundits frequently cite "The Sopranos" as one of the greatest television series of all time, and that reputation is warranted. From the very first episode to the eternally controversial series finale in 2007, David Chase's crime drama cemented HBO as a prime destination for "prestige" television, ushering in a new era of television storytelling along the way. Italian-American Mafia boss Tony Soprano's struggle to hold his family and livelihood together remains as compelling and impactful as it did nearly two decades ago, thanks to top-notch writing and an Emmy Award-winning cast.

It's tough to pick favorites from such a legendary roster of characters, but Paulie "Walnuts" Gualtieri ranks among the best. The late Tony Sirico (who passed away in July 2022), transformed Paulie into one of the show's biggest personalities. His wisecracking and neurotic nature brings much comedic relief, but beneath that larger-than-life exterior is an emotionally complex man whose paranoia and competitive streak often puts him at odds with the rest of the Soprano crime family. From landscaping feuds to encounters with the supernatural, here are our picks for the 12 best Paulie Walnuts episodes.

Mergers And Acquisitions (Season 4, Episode 8)

Their bond as mother and son wasn't perfect -- a recurring theme in "The Sopranos" -- but we still adored Nucci and Paulie's relationship. Season 4's "Mergers and Acquisitions" showed the lengths to which Paulie would go to ensure his mother's happiness, taking the strong-arm tactics of the mafia to Green Grove's retirement community.

Nucci's problems with fitting in at Green Grove would be explored further later in the season, but Paulie is quick to defend his mother when he learns that the other residents -- including Cookie Cirillo and Minn Matrone -- don't like her. For the most part, Paulie is charming with Nucci in earshot, although we can't help but laugh when he tells Cookie and Minn that, "When I was a kid, you two were old ladies. Now I'm old, and you two are still old!"

In a show like "The Sopranos," using the threat of violence to get what you want feels as common as Tony eating cold cuts straight out of the fridge. But few men would do it quite like Paulie Walnuts, who tracks down Cookie's son and gives him an ultimatum: tell your ma to be nice ... or else. Chuckie Cirillo's inaction lands him a beating from Little Paulie and Benny, proving that you're never too old to be a momma's boy.

Mayham (Season 6, Episode 3)

Paulie loves and respects Tony Soprano as much as the next wise guy, but no matter how deep that love runs, his Achilles heel is always money. With Tony left in a coma after Junior shot him in the explosive Season 6 opener, the Soprano family must consider what comes next if things go south. Naturally, Paulie's mind goes straight to his wallet, and "Mayham" brought out the ugliness of his greed at the worst possible time.

This episode opens, quite purposefully, with Paulie and Vito discussing Carmela's devotion to Tony in his time of need. "The Sopranos" fills the screen with hypocrites, and that's why it's no surprise when the pair quickly begin scheming behind her back. If a mafia boss dies, his crew's supposed to financially support the surviving family. But when Paulie gets shorted on a heist, he resents those obligations and considers holding back the payments to Carmela for his financial benefit.

It would do the episode no justice to leave out a classic moment of Paulie comedy when his bedside griping to Tony about his own health sends the comatose boss into cardiac arrest. It's a genius bit of bleak humor that also echoes Paulie's temptation to betray Carmela and the Soprano kids. With Tony's emergence from his coma at the end of the episode, Paulie reluctantly hands over the cash, but -- much like Carmella -- the audience won't quickly forget it.

Remember When (Season 6, Episode 15)

As "Pine Barrens" proved, Paulie isn't the easiest guy to be stuck in an enclosed space with. In "Remember When," the FBI unearths the remains of Tony's first-ever hit, forcing him and Paulie to hide in Florida. It's the rare episode where we see Paulie through another character's eyes, and what Tony sees in his old friend truly vexes him. This episode served as an edge-of-your-seat culmination of ongoing friction between Paulie and Tony, reflecting how serious the stakes have become by the final season.

Tony could never prove it, but ever since the Ginny Sack joke leaked out, he's held (correct) suspicions about Paulie's culpability. The trip to Florida isn't just to lay low, but also an opportunity to extract the truth from Paulie once and for all. Tony has forgiven a lot over the years they've known each other, but with the families at war, Paulie's big mouth is more than annoying, it's a liability. When Paulie keeps bragging about the family's past exploits to strangers, you can hardly blame Tony for reaching the end of his tether.

The murder of Pussy at sea back in Season 2 was one of the show's most heartbreaking moments, and the choice to call back to that moment as Tony weighs up whacking Paulie on a boat opens up those wounds all over again. We were as relieved as Paulie that he ultimately passed the test.

Second Opinion (Season 3, Episode 7)

Christopher Moltisanti's initiation as a made man in Season 3 marks a major turning point for the character. It provides a chance to prove his capability to the family, but it also puts him directly in Paulie's crosshairs as a target for hazing and exploitation. Of all the grief Paulie puts Christopher through, the pettiest has got to be the antics in "Second Opinion."

While Tony finds a credible doctor to treat Junior's cancer, and Carmela weighs up the morality of her marriage, Paulie and Christopher lock horns like a pair of Italian stags. Paulie maintains the upper hand thanks to his seniority in the family, and he puts Chrissie through the wringer with earnings. It's not merely about making the latest made man prove himself; Paulie enjoys having a subordinate, especially if he can squeeze some passive income out of the situation.

Their tension reaches a fever pitch after Paulie subjects Christopher to a humiliating strip search at the Bing, followed by an impromptu apartment inspection in the middle of the night, during which Paulie sniffs Adriana's underwear. With Tony refusing to mediate, things look dicey, until Paulie pulls out an expected symbol of cease-fire: a Big Mouth Billy Bass. Sure, it didn't defuse the pair's feud long-term, but the laughs they share are a moment of goofy levity that everyone -- audience included -- desperately needed.

Walk Like A Man (Season 6, Episode 17)

Some of the best Paulie episodes of "The Sopranos" are the ones in which he's got a bone to pick with Christopher (or vice versa), and we rate this one highly. Paulie's long-running disrespect for Chris reaches an all-time high in "Walk Like a Man," leading to a minor war of attrition with dire consequences for the young man.

With Chris's father-in-law as the middle-man, he and Paulie set up a lucrative side hustle selling stolen power tools. A great arrangement for all parties involved; but when Little Paulie starts skimming the product, Chris demands a resolution from Paulie and Tony. Their refusal to play ball is the inciting incident in a brutal back-and-forth between Paulie and Chris, which lands Little Paulie in the hospital and even sees Paulie tearing up Christopher's front lawn with his car.

To directly blame Paulie for Christopher's falling off the wagon in this episode wouldn't be quite fair. Tony already played a major role in that earlier in the season, and it was arguably an inevitability in their line of work. But we think it's also reasonable to point out that Paulie's recurring position as the antagonist in their relationship certainly helped lay the groundwork. Paulie's roasting of a drunken Christopher is more than a tipping point for the young Capo; it represents a tragic indictment of a man who could've helped steer Chris away from the darkness.

Commendatori (Season 2, Episode 4)

The made men of "The Sopranos" take great pride in their Italian heritage, especially Paulie. When Tony arranges a trip to Naples with Christopher and Paulie, it's more than business. It's as if they're going home for the very first time. But their romanticized beliefs about the ancestral homeland face scrutiny, as Tony clashes with the head of the local crime family boss, Christopher spends most of his time getting high, and Paulie receives the cold shoulder from the locals. 

It's a sobering experience for the trio, and Paulie's fish-out-of-water antics are among his most memorable. Tony handles the business during their time in Italy, negotiating a car-smuggling operation with a local crime family distantly related to his own. While Christopher explores the world of high-quality heroin from his hotel bed, Paulie hits the streets and tries desperately to blend in using the few Italian phrases he knows. Despite his earnest exclamations of "commendatori," the Neapolitan people can spot the foreigner from a mile away, and he's either ignored or rebuffed. 

As the opening scene of the Soprano crew trying (and failing) to watch a bootleg copy of "The Godfather Part II" so poetically suggests, there's a gaping chasm between the Paulie Walnuts of the world and his European counterparts. His expression of relief on the drive home through New Jersey says it all.

Eloise (Season 4, Episode 12)

By Season 4, Paulie's relationship with Tony becomes strained. After a stint in prison, Paulie returns home to find himself outmatched by Ralphie's earnings and feeling increasingly irrelevant. He finds an ally in Johnny Sack, but after the Ginny Sack joke leaks out, Tony becomes suspicious of their bond. "Eloise" finds Paulie at one of his lowest points in the series, as he comes to a crossroads in his loyalties and stands up for his mother to deadly results.

At the club, Silvio raises the issue of Paulie's performance, hinting that it may impact his standing with the family. Despite pleading to the contrary, Paulie is genuinely concerned, and his allegiance with Johnny seems more crucial than ever. That house of cards comes tumbling down when Paulie bumps into Carmine Sr. at a wedding, only to learn that the New Jersey crew's knowledge of him starts and ends with Johnny.

This all leads to one of Paulie's most woeful on-screen acts: the robbery and murder of an elderly woman. After Nucci gets into a minor fender-bender with friends Cookie and Minn, Paulie pitches in as a temporary chauffeur and begins to notice how poorly they treat her. Paulie's efforts to stand up for his mother are as lovely as they are hilarious, but we'd say that good will gets canceled out by smothering Minn to death when she catches him robbing her house.

Where's Johnny? (Season 5, Episode 3)

Season 5's "Where's Johnny?" is jam-packed with iconic moments amidst its heavier plot developments. There's Junior mistaking an episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" for footage of himself and Bobby Bacala, and the oft-quoted line: "He never had the makings of a varsity athlete." But we've also got to give credit to the ridiculous landscaping feud between Paulie and Feech La Manna.

Anyone who's seen Robert Loggia as Mr. Eddy in David Lynch's "Lost Highway" knows how terrifying the late actor was in an onscreen fit of rage, and he brought that same intensity to the role of Feech. Newly released from prison and ready to make up for lost time, Feech kicked off an absurd territory war with Paulie after finding gardener Sal Vitro working in a neighborhood he wanted for his nephews. Both sides end up with casualties as the aging mobsters clash.

You're probably thinking the entire premise is ridiculous, and you'd be correct. To men like Paulie and Feech, the Sal Vitros of the world are disposable pawns in a broader game. As long as they get their cut, it doesn't matter who gets hurt. It's hard to choose which scene is funnier: Paulie nodding along to Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" before attacking the La Manna brothers, or his insistence to Tony that it was an act of self-defense: "He jumped out of the tree and come at me with a chainsaw!"

The Ride (Season 6, Episode 9)

"The Ride" offers some of the season's biggest developments: Christopher learns that he and Kelli have a baby on the way and he proposes to her, only to end up breaking his sobriety in a big way after Tony pressures him into a toast. For Paulie, it's a point where his personality quirks have become a thorn in the side of his friends and family, and it's beginning to turn everyone against him.

Every year, the family chips in to fund the Feast of Saint Elzear, a Catholic festival celebrated with a local fair. Among other responsibilities, Paulie is in charge of the safety and working conditions of fairground rides; a duty he skimps on to reduce his bottom line. Predictably, there's a major accident when one of the rides malfunctions, leaving several riders (including a child) with serious injuries. Bobby and Janice's daughter Domenica is among the attendees who were nearly injured, and it's satisfying to see typically timid Bobby confront Paulie about how irresponsible and dangerous his frugality has become: "Everybody wants to get rich, but you don't scrimp on safety." 

He's not wrong; nor is Nucci, who Paulie angrily rebuffs when she pleads with him to reconsider his attitude. As frustrating as Paulie is in this episode, we think it's all worth it for two unforgettable scenes: Paulie's vision of the Virgin Mary at the Bing and the beautiful conclusion with mother and son watching television as an evening breeze blows through the window.

The Fleshy Part Of The Thigh (Season 6, Episode 4)

As much as we love Paulie's comedic side, the times he couldn't wisecrack or shoot out of a situation are equally as memorable. The mobster's persistent worries about death and family came to fruition with the passing of his aunt Dottie, leading to revelations about his heritage and fueling one of Tony Sirico's best performances.

In "The Fleshy Part of the Thigh," Paulie visits Dottie after learning that she's in her final days. Her deathbed confession hits Paulie harder than any bullet could: she's his birth mother. A war-time fling with a soldier led to Dottie falling pregnant; facing shame from their family, Nucci adopted Paulie as her own. Understandably, Paulie is shaken to the core, and Sirico carries the weight of that inner turmoil to heartbreaking effect. As he puts it: "The worst thing is, I'm not who I am." 

After watching how important his bond with Nucci has been over the years, it's impossible for us not to feel for Paulie as he's torn back and forth across the emotional spectrum. Although Tony convinces him to forgive Nucci, in light of all the love she's given over the years, it's not an easy decision. He's even brought to tears by Jason Barone's mother pleading for her son's life; a sight you'd never expect from a stone-cold killer. And that's why this episode's final scene, in which Paulie savagely beats Jason to extort retirement home funding for Nucci, delivers the perfect punchline.

From Where To Eternity (Season 2, Episode 9)

Paulie Walnuts is a superstitious man, the inevitable result of an old-school Catholic upbringing and a life of sin. It's no surprise that he takes matters of the afterlife seriously, and "From Where to Eternity" explores Paulie's superstitious anxieties in a subplot as hilarious as it is revealing. With Christopher in critical condition after Matt and Sean's attempt on his life, Paulie and the rest of the family gather to pay their respects and comfort Adriana. Despite a close call during which he's clinically dead for over a minute, Christopher recovers and shares a cryptic vision of the great beyond that leaves Paulie haunted: "Tell Tony and Paulie, three o'clock."

Tony might be able to shrug off Christopher's near-death experience as a dream, but it's not so simple for a guy like Paulie. He's not getting any younger, plenty of skeletons sit in his closet, and the uncertainty of whether Christopher really saw purgatory (or Hell) is just too much to bear. After experiencing severe nightmares, Paulie violates his religious instincts by visiting a medium, only to throw a chair and storm out when the psychic appears to channel the spirits of Paulie's past victims. "That's what this is, you know," he says. "Satanic black magic. Sick s***!"

It's undeniably some of Paulie's funniest material. But the episode also reminds us that underneath all the horrific violence, dirty jokes, and tough-guy posturing, everybody in "The Sopranos" has skeletons in their closet.

Pine Barrens (Season 3, Episode 11)

If we could pick a single episode to recommend to anybody on the fence about starting "The Sopranos," it would have to be "Pine Barrens." Directed by actor Steve Buscemi — who would later join the show's cast as Tony's cousin — it's a comedy of errors sparked by Paulie's impulsivity and accelerated by Christopher's hot head.

At Tony's request, Paulie and Christopher make a collection visit to Russian associate Valery. Arriving on the scene in a foul mood, Paulie antagonizes Valery so much that a clumsy brawl breaks out, and it takes both Paulie and Christopher to put the Russian down. They're too busy bickering to check if he's really dead, so when they drive his body out to the freezing Pine Barrens of New Jersey, Valery bursts out of the car and flees into the wilderness. The ensuing wild goose chase has Paulie and Christopher braving the elements and at each other's throats before you can say "gabagool."

It's "The Sopranos" with the dial turned all the way to black comedy. Paulie and Christopher are capable soldiers in their own right, but from the bungled murder to mishearing Tony's directions ("The guy was an interior decorator!") to fighting over Tic-Tacs, they prove themselves to be no better than Abbott and Costello. 

Read this next: The 18 Best Crime Dramas In TV History

The post 12 Best Paulie Walnuts Episodes of The Sopranos, Ranked appeared first on /Film.

This article contains spoilers for "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3."

If you've seen "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3," you probably have some questions. How is the new lineup of Guardians going to gel together? Did the High Evolutionary survive? Who is the seemingly pivotal new character Adam Warlock, and why was he so wasted in the film? These are all valid, even burning questions. But I have another one for you, one that may not be as burning, but is just as valid, given a remarkable amount of character development on his behalf. What, uh, is Groot?

It's easy to look past the peculiarity that is Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel and played primarily by Krystian Godlewski in motion capture) when the other Guardians include a bug lady, a jacked killing machine, and a talking raccoon. But even in the sprawling Marvel Cinematic Universe, there are few creatures as singular as Groot. He's an anthropomorphic humanoid tree made of ultra-hardy dendronic wood, he ranges between baby-sized and ten feet tall, and he can (basically) only say one thing: "I am Groot." Though the MCU Groot is worlds away from his Marvel comic book origins, one thing remains the same: his strong-and-silent-type aura of mystery inspires feverish fan theorizing. 

By the beginning of "Vol. 3," every Guardian except the newly-arrived from the past Gamora can understand what he really means when he utters his iconic, Pokémon-esque catchphrase. Once she's spent enough time with him, she starts understanding him too. And finally, by the end of the film, one of the biggest mysteries of Groot is finally unveiled: we, the audience, having ventured far and wide throughout the galaxy with him, can now understand what he's saying too.

'That's Exactly What It Means'

At the end of "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3," the Guardians are all talking and Groot utters the line, "I love you guys." And we actually hear it, for what it means, in English! It slips by relatively quickly. You'd be forgiven if you didn't even catch it. But the moment is the perfect send-off to the most beloved team in the MCU, indicating that we too played our part in defending the galaxy from evil. We're accepted by the Guardians as one of their own, and we're even loved by old Grooty. 

Director James Gunn confirmed this interpretation when it was posed to him on Twitter, saying, "Spoiler alert: Yes, that's exactly what it means." But it's one thing to understand Groot, another to be loved by him, and quite another to appreciate what that means. This final lifting of the veil between us and the camaraderie of the Guardians comes at the end of a long journey for, as Rocket puts it in the first movie, Groot's "vocabulistics." If we had understood Groot's endangered language in the first Guardians film, it wouldn't have made nearly the impact it makes when it comes at the end of "Vol. 3." 

But because director James Gunn is one of the better filmmakers within the pan-Marvel-DC-universe, one who is particularly adept at character development, this minor third-act twist hits the audience as an experience of complete catharsis. If you're hazy on exactly what seeds Gunn planted over the trilogy to sprout up this gorgeous canopy of fan service, then come take a walk with me, will you?

The Evolution Of 'I Am Groot'

Groot's comic debut came in 1960, predating just about every Marvel comics hero and villain, save Captain America and Namor the Sub-Mariner. In "Tales to Astonish" #13, Groot was a villain dubbed "the Monster from Planet X" who'd come to Earth to abduct humans for all manner of sinister experiments. Crucially, in this incarnation, he spoke perfect English. When he finally appeared as a Guardian in Gunn's first film in the trilogy, he more closely resembled his brief appearance in the 2008 crossover comic "Annihilation: Conquest." That's where we first saw Gamora, Drax, Star-Lord, Mantis, Rocket, and Groot -- all products of different writers -- united on the side of good. It's also where Groot was given both his friendship with Rocket and his amusing speech limitations.

In the first film, Rocket comments that Groot "don't know talking good like me and you," that his "vocabulistics" are "limited to 'I' and 'am' and 'Groot,' exclusively in that order." By the film's end, Groot's mind and heart have clearly expanded as he declares "We are Groot" before sacrificing himself. 

Groot's crucial role in the larger MCU was clear by "Avengers: Infinity War." Several Guardians had come to be able to understand the language of his Flora colossus people, and even Captain America politely responds, "I am Captain America," when Groot quips his famous line.

It already felt like we knew the brawny old oak as well as we know Star-Lord or Rocket, but Gunn decided to gift us with the power of interpretation in "Vol. 3," when we hear him utter, "I love you guys." Groot's been blown up, re-planted, cycled through a baby phase, and it appears his evolution is far from over. Wherever the new Guardians go next, we hope Groot remains not just the team's muscle, but its heart.

"Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" is currently in theaters.

Read this next: 11 Marvel Comics Villains We Really Want To See In The MCU

The post James Gunn Confirms What We Suspected About That Sweet Groot Scene appeared first on /Film.

One of the things "Yellowjackets" does well is give its viewers many mysteries to delve into and try to unravel: Who (or what) is the Antler Queen? What girls end up surviving their harrowing 19 months lost in the Canadian wilderness? Is there something supernatural going on? And, in that vein, who is the man with no eyes, and what the heck is up with that symbol we see carved into the trees and elsewhere in the woods?

It turns out that the show's cast is in the dark about the answers to these questions almost as much as we are. And in a recent interview with The A.V. Club, Nuha Jes Izman — who plays young Misty's BFF Crystal — confirmed that she and her fellow actors wouldn't know what was going on in an episode until a week out from shooting. "We get our scripts maybe a week before we film that episode — so we're figuring things out, like you guys as well," she said. "We have no idea what's in store in season 3, or what the explanation for a bunch of things are."

Same, girl, same. And just like the folks on Reddit and other corners of internet, the cast has their own chat going on where they theorize what the hell the writers are setting up with each episode. "We have a little group text with all of us, and every once in a while you'll get one of us sending theories like, 'Woah! Someone just put this on Reddit — maybe that's actually what's happening!'" she added. "We're all theorizing as much as everyone else, and love going on Twitter and Reddit and things like that."

What's In A Symbol?

One thing that Nuha Jes Izman apparently knows something about that we don't yet is the meaning of the enigmatic symbol the girls find carved into trees and other places in their forest encampment. Here's what she shared about the image:

"What can I say ... the writers really do dive into what the symbol means as the season progresses. At first, I honestly had no idea. It's this thing that the writers do so well: allow the audience to interpret something. Even with the whole 'Is it supernatural, or is it them losing their minds?' aspect of it all. I think that's half the fun. Like, you really don't know. Is it a good thing that Lottie's drawing this everywhere and putting this everywhere? Or is it doing them more harm than good? Why is it all around the trees? How did it get there before them? The audience gets to find things out along as we [on the show] do. It's either that, or they find things out before we do and kind of see us figure it out. But I've seen some people talk about getting [the symbol] tattooed on them, and I would just say maybe wait till we find out what it is before you get a tattoo of it on you! [Laughs]"

While Izman raises more questions than answers here, it seems wise to heed her advice about permanently inking your skin with a symbol whose origins might not be what you think. Hopefully, the meaning of the symbol will eventually become clear — we'll have to keep watching to find out, with new episodes of season 2 streaming on Showtime every Friday and airing on television every Sunday.

Read this next: Yellowjackets Post-Cannibalism Clarity Is Hard To Swallow

The post The Yellowjackets Cast Theorizes About the Show Just as Much as the Fans appeared first on /Film.

For those who aren't ready to take the plunge and buy a completely electric vehicle, there are great plug-in hybrid vehicles available that promise to be excellent alternatives.

Apple was previously reported to unveil two 3nm chipsets later this year, the A17 Bionic and M3. Unfortunately, with an earlier rumor claiming that the M3 has been delayed until next year, we shall only have one announcement of an SoC made on TSMC’s cutting-edge architecture, but there must have been a reason for this delay. While yield production of 3nm wafers is one of them, there are other factors at play.

Mac and iPad sales saw a decline in Q2 2023, while iPhone shipments picked up, making up more than 50 percent of Apple’s revenue for the quarter, making it a huge reason for just the A17 Bionic to launch

The $24.1 billion profit that Apple garnered from its $94.8 billion revenue for Q2 2023 was contributed by iPhone sales, a category that brought $51.3 billion in revenue. Keep in mind that despite a slowdown in the economy, Apple’s iPhone sales outpaced the revenue figure from the previous quarter, where the technology giant’s handset segment generated $50.6 billion. However, the same success could not be repeated by the Mac and iPad family, which only made $7.2 billion and $6.7 billion, respectively.

Also, both product categories’ revenue was lower compared to the previous quarter, so on top of having to deal with TSMC’s 3nm chip production issues, Apple had another conundrum to tackle. Even if 3nm chip production stabilized and Apple managed to launch the M3 on schedule, it would matter little if customers were not purchasing any next-generation Mac or iPad. The iPhone, however, is something millions would gravitate to, especially the ‘Pro’ models, as these two will exclusively feature the 3nm A17 Bionic.

Delaying the M3 is the smart choice because TSMC is apparently unable to cumulatively meet the demand for it and the A17 Bionic, so at least now, the Taiwanese manufacturer has some breathing room to focus more on the high-end iPhone chipset. Apple intends to keep the momentum going for its Mac business with the unveiling of a 15-inch MacBook Air, and though it is reported to feature the same M2 as previously released models, it will be a breath of fresh air as it flaunts a new display size for an existing lineup.

Even if Mac and iPad sales disappoint throughout the year, Apple is reported to incorporate more exclusive features to the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max, so their demand should offset the decline from other products. We still have two more financial quarters to go, so even if Apple does unveil the M3, we will still see the world’s first 3nm chip in a few months.

Any Buster Keaton movie is a feast of visual invention and breakneck energy -- to the point of wondering if some of the performers ever broke their necks -- which is part of why they continue to hold up, even in the 21st century. To see the man in his prime is to see a true death-defier, one who braved the wilderness that was the world of early cinema and conquered it with grace and fearlessness.

In his 1926 film "The General," Keaton gave audiences what they wanted in the form of a chaotic romp and unpredictable stunts. He also delivered spectacle, with an episode of Civil War history that he could shape into a classic Buster Keaton experience. Keaton's movie was like the 19th-century equivalent of the post-apocalyptic car chase of "Mad Max: Fury Road," as director George Miller readily admits. Rather than futuristic, modded vehicles, it's a movie of trains, one that was also dangerous.

And very expensive. As with any Keaton movie, you watch it in awe of the gags and stunts. But "The General," both in its subject matter and scale, operates on a different level. Here, Keaton's characteristic grace and physicality are wedded to (and clashing against) the unstoppable, unceasing travel of the locomotive. In using those trains, Keaton gave himself a difficult and complex workload.

But beyond that, he burdened the movie with a high budget and a particular shot that ranks among the most expensive of any shot in the silent era. In fact, some sources call it the most expensive. It's definitely the most iconic, a shot that even now has viewers wondering how they did it: an extreme wide shot of a train, moving through the woods, falling through a collapsing bridge into the river below as soldiers ford it.

The Great Locomotive Chase

It's 1861 in Georgia, and word is spreading around town that war is coming. Every man in town signs up to enlist, but the hapless train engineer Johnnie Gray (Buster Keaton) is deemed ineligible, a better fit for the Confederate army as an engineer. Instead of joining the cause, he gets back to working on his train, the titular "General," one of the two loves of his life. The other love is Annabelle Lee (Marion Mack), who rejects him when he can't make it into the army.

According to James Curtis' "Buster Keaton: A Filmmaker's Life," Keaton was given the story by his regular co-writer and collaborator, a storied comedic writer and filmmaker named Clyde Bruckman. He had found a book by Union Civil War veteran William Pittenger called "The Great Locomotive Chase," a nonfiction account of a wild moment in the war's history, in which a small Union dispatch stole a train from the Deep South. As the Confederates chased the rogue train up north, the Union soldiers left fires and downed trees in their wake, making for an enormously difficult pursuit.

The operation was complex, and doing justice to the book would lead to, as Keaton recalled Bruckman saying, "A lot of film with no laughs in it." So they reshaped it. For one, the story wouldn't be told from the perspective of Union spies, but from the Confederates whose trains are stolen. Being on the losing side of the war was a more natural fit for Keaton's famous sad loner shtick.

As repellent as it is for modern audiences, the establishing context of the Civil War is limited mostly to the first reel. The true story was gutted for a movie full of some of Keaton's most daring work ever, as his character fights for his train.

Up In Cottage Grove

Finding a proper location for the production of "The General" proved to be a difficult task. Buster Keaton's not insubstantial perfectionism meant that the look had to be just right, which first led the production team to scout the real South. Per James Curtis, Keaton went from "Atlanta, Georgia to Chattanooga" and still was unable to find a suitable location to stage his feature-length train chase. In fact, he was most perturbed by the railroad tracks, which were too wide and too modern to look accurate.

On location manager Bert Jackson's recommendation, Keaton's company traveled to the opposite corner of the country in Cottage Grove, Oregon. The town was effectively a settlement in the wilderness, one that looked more Southern than the actual South. The only problem was that its distance from civilization meant it would be extremely expensive, with production costs coming to a reported $400 an hour even if film wasn't getting exposed.

As the production unit established itself in town, Keaton charmed locals with his classic tricks and a genuine fascination with trains. The railroads in Cottage Grove were narrow-gauge, in keeping with Keaton's concept of 19th-century technology.

He soon purchased two engines, one of which would be the train in the famed burning bridge shot. Sets were built and tourists from Seattle and elsewhere descended upon the formerly quiet town to observe the production. As the director, Keaton liked to pat himself on the back for getting the historical sweep of the chase with perfect accuracy, but as a performer, he brought in some of his classic improvisation and electric gag work, making sure that the scope never overwhelmed the Buster Keaton of it all.

Building Bridges

According to James Curtis' "Buster Keaton: A Filmmaker's Life," Keaton and company had been talking up what would become the movie's most iconic shot throughout production. In "The Great Locomotive Chase," the book that inspired the movie, there was an episode in which the Union train thieves attempted to set a river bridge behind them on fire. As Keaton and co-writer Clyde Bruckman saw it, such a moment could be exactly the climactic centerpiece the movie needed.

When a modern viewer sees that shot, they have to wonder how it was done. The answer? They just did it.

Keaton was sure of one thing: the shot would not be accomplished through fakery or movie magic or miniatures. It would be the real thing, all of it. A real train, real fire, real bridge. If Keaton was always in competition with fellow silent movie maestro Charlie Chaplin, it would effectively come to an end here, as the director was set to create an unrivaled cinematic moment.

Keaton knew what he needed visually for the shot, and he reportedly examined every potential location in the region to find the perfect setting. It was not a shot that could be replicated -- when you're running a train through a burning bridge, you only get one chance to do it right, even if you have a blank check while making your movie.

The company ended up having to build its own bridge that would be set on fire. The bridge needed to be built to exact specifications, running 250 feet long at a 50-foot height above Oregon's Row River. It had to be capable of holding the engine and breaking down on cue.

A Magnificent Image

"The General" largely concerns Confederate engineer Johnnie Gray's pursuit of his beloved train, the General, using another train called the Texas. He has to abandon it when he ends up behind enemy lines and needs cover. By the next day, he spots his beloved engine, steals it back, and sets a fire on the Rock River Bridge.

Union soldiers give chase in the Texas, and as the Texas hits the bridge, the fire becomes too significant for it to handle, causing the train to fall into the river. Meanwhile, hundreds of soldiers ford the river, all in the same shot. As director, Buster Keaton had come a long way from the mentorship he'd received from Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle years prior.

It's a magnificent image, one that required nearly a thousand extras. It was an extremely expensive shot, one that could only be filmed once. According to numerous sources, including James Curtis's "Buster Keaton: A Filmmaker's Life," the shot cost $40,000, making it the most expensive single shot of any film at the time. And it was an event -- that day on July 23rd, 1926 saw some of the most excitement to ever greet Cottage Grove. In fact, many town merchants took the day off.

Onlookers from town camped out to see the shot, seeing a day's worth of rehearsals as Keaton worked to get the timing of the shot perfectly down. Small complications arose and the mood was tense. On that day, they decided to douse the bridge with gasoline and load it with dynamite to better time the explosion. And then, as the cameras began to roll and Keaton saw the flames, he called it off, not liking how they were looking.

The Most Expensive Shot In Movie History (Circa 1926)

According to James Curtis, there were a couple of thousand spectators on hand to watch the shot, eagerly awaiting its completion despite numerous setbacks. Even besides the flames that Buster Keaton rejected, another take had to be prematurely stopped when two boys were spotted swimming in the river.

The cost of the shot, the spectacle of it, and the danger of it seemed to make everybody a little anxious. Even the soldiers ruined one shot by charging into the water a little too soon. Before long, the production would lose its light, meaning the shot would have to wait another day.

But Keaton got the shot. As he called for the upriver dam to open, with water flowing again through the river, he called for the bridge to be set on fire, and, finally, called action on the shot. Dummies were flung from the train as it fell successfully and beautifully through the bridge, which collapsed with perfect timing. Some spectators may have reportedly fainted, and the extra water from the dam opening may have almost led to some of the soldiers drowning, but they got the shot.

The movie ended up being a flop, but it made for a cinematic achievement now rarely matched, and a modern reputation as one of the all-time greats. If it really was the most expensive shot any movie had produced to that point, it was worth it, creating a genuinely spectacular moment that almost certainly would be illegal to make today.

Read this next: The 20 Most Influential Comedy Stars In Movie History

The post The Story Behind The Most Expensive Shot in Silent Film History appeared first on /Film.

A recent breach in MSI's servers exposed Intel's BootGuard keys and has now put the security of various devices at risk.

Major MSI Breach Affects The Security of Various Intel Devices

Last month, a hacker group by the name of Money Message revealed that they had breached MSI's servers and stolen 1.5 TBs of data from the company's servers including source code amongst a list of various files that are important to the integrity of the company. The group asked MSI to pay $4.0 million in ransom to avert them from releasing the files to the public but MSI refused the payment.

This action promoted the group to release the files on public servers this Thursday and based on an investigation done by BINARLY, the files include Intel BootGuard keys from MSI which not only affects MSI itself but also other major vendors including Intel, Lenovo, Supermicron & many others.

Digging deeper into the aftermath of the @msiUSA data breach and its impact on the industry.

Leaked Intel BootGuard keys from MSI are affecting many different device vendors, including @Intel , @Lenovo, @Supermicro_SMCI, and many others industry-wide.

#FwHunt is on! https://t.co/NuPIUJQUgr pic.twitter.com/ZB8XKj33Hv

— BINARLY (@binarly_io) May 5, 2023

The leaked files contain signing keys for a total of over 200 MSI products which can be used to access the firmware of these devices. These include a total of 57 devices whose Firmware Image Signing Keys have leaked out and 116 devices whose Intel BootGuard Keys have leaked.

Why these keys are so important is because they are used to flag certain software that isn't verified as untrusted and "potentially malicious", says PCMAG. These keys can be used to tag malicious software with malware as trusted and handed over to the system which ends up compromising its security.

“The signing keys for fw [firmware] image allow an attacker to craft malicious firmware updates and it can be delivered through normal BIOS update processes with MSI update tools,” Binarly CEO Alex Matrosov tells PCMag.

MSI replied to its customers to avoid downloading UEFI/BIOS Firmware from any place except its own official websites where the proper version will be available without any fear of being compromised. Furthermore, since these files have been made public over the last couple of days, it is very likely a number of UEFI/BIOS firmware are already floating around various sections of the web with malicious code.

It seems this leak affects not only Intel Boot Guard technology, but all OEM signing-based mechanisms in CSME, such as OEM unlock (Orange Unlock), ISH firmware, SMIP and others... https://t.co/Eptmbo6cci

— Mark Ermolov (@_markel___) May 5, 2023

According to Alex Matrosov, the CEO of BINARLY, the leak is confirmed to include Intel's private keys for OEM devices. Furthermore, the BootGuard may not be as effective on devices based on 11th-Gen Tiger Lake, 12th-Gen Alder Lake, and 13th-Gen Raptor Lake platforms. The leak also affects all OEM signing-based mechanisms within CSME (Converged Security and Management Engine) as stated by Alex. Intel and its partners who are affected by this leak have to to comment on how they plan on tackling this major security flaw that's occured through this breach.

Here's how to setup a passkey for your Google account and forget your password for good.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Insider: Employees at Apple's first unionized store in Towson, Maryland are pushing for a contract that includes the introduction of tipping. The proposed system would allow customers to tip store workers in increments of 3%, 5%, or a customized amount for in-store credit card transactions. It's part of a broader list of economic proposals as the union heads into negotiation with Apple. Bloomberg first reported the details of the proposals Wednesday. The employees at the Towson store organized as the Coalition of Organized Retail Employees in June when they voted to be represented by The International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers. CORE's Twitter account outlined some of the proposals in a thread on Thursday, where it acknowledged the tipping system might be a "little controversial." "A big ask from our team when preparing for negotiations was to include some sort of profit-sharing or bonus structure," the union said in the thread. "We thought a lot about the easiest way to accomplish this and we thought adopting a model already used by other workers who provide services to their community might be the simplest to implement." The union also noted that "all monies collected through this manner would be dispersed to members of the bargaining unit biweekly based on any hours worked." Other proposals for negotiation with Apple include expanding Apple's list of paid holidays, increasing vacation time for full-time and part-time employees, and offering wellness leave. They're also asking Apple to double pay for staffers who work over 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week, double overtime weekend pay, increased pay for first-aid certified workers, and offering a maximum of 34 weeks of severance pay after layoffs. "We realize that this is a negotiation, and these are initial proposals," said a union representative. "Our goal is and always has been to bring back an acceptable contract for the membership to ratify."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Tom Shadyac's 1997 comedy film "Liar Liar" had a light supernatural concept: Fletcher Reed, a typical Hollywood Workholic Dad (known in screenwriting circles as "reliable, clichéd character type #4") constantly lies to his family and clients in order to succeed in life. As a lawyer, lying is handy. As a father, however, lying gets him in trouble with his five-year-old son, Max (Justin Cooper). As such, the child makes a birthday wish, longing that his dad cannot lie for just one day. The wish comes true. 

What follows is a comedic showcase for star Jim Carrey to put his talents for physical comedy on display. The actor hilariously mugs and thrashes about in agony as Fletcher's newfound truthfulness gets him in various amounts of trouble. In one case, he cannot lie to exonerate a dishonest client. In another, he says openly lascivious things to a woman on the elevator. He gets slapped in the face and even arrested for his comments. 

"Liar Liar" is slick Hollywood pabulum, invented merely as a showcase vehicle for its superstar lead actor; Jim Carrey was one of the biggest stars in the world at the time. The film cost $45 million to make, with $20 million of that providing Carrey's salary (though another film would mark his biggest payday). The payday was worth it. "Liar Liar" made over $302 million worldwide. 

"Liar Liar" was also a chance for director Shadyac to include a few jokes and Easter eggs, cracking wise at Carrey's career. Did you know, for instance, that Fire Marshal Bill, a character Carrey created for the hit sketch comedy series "In Living Color," has a cameo?

Fire Marshal Bill

One cannot overstate the popularity of "In Living Color." Keenan Ivory Wayans' sketch comedy program, which ran from 1990 to 1994, was meant as a diverse counterpoint to stodgy, older sketch comedy shows like "Saturday Night Live," and featured stranger, edgier humor. It also featured regular dance routines from the show's in-house troupe, the Fly Girls, and regular hip-hop music acts. Several notable characters emerged from "In Living Color," including Homey the Clown (Damon Wayans), Wanda (Jamie Foxx), and Fire Marshal Bill. 

Fire Marshal Bill was a scarred and mentally damaged fire marshal who, when teaching others about fire safety, often did a great deal of bodily damage to himself. Undeterred by injury, his lessons would persist. His lessons also typically ended in fires and explosions. Fire Marshal Bill's upper lip had seemingly been burnt off, and Carrey played the part with his sizable front teeth jutting out. He was the only character to appear in all five seasons of the show. 

At the end of "Liar Liar," Fletcher makes a mad dash to the airport to stop his son from being moved to Boston with his ex-wife Audrey (Maura Tierney). In so doing, he steals a wheeled boarding staircase vehicle and flees out onto an actual runway. This leads to his own injury. The following scene is the immediate aftermath of Fletcher's crimes, with the plane stopped and fire personnel surging in to help. Tierney, Cooper, and Cary Elwes stand next to each other in the fracas to talk to a police officer.

Look at the photo above. Behind the lead actors, one can see Jim Carrey -- in character as Fire Marshall Bill -- standing in the crowd. See it in action below too. 

Funning On Jim

It seems that Carrey is having a wonderful time playing Fire Marshal Bill, his first time playing the role in three years. A look at the extras around him reveals that they are snickering and laughing at whatever he may be saying. While the Fire Marshall Bill character isn't wearing his signature hat, the jutted-out teeth, and demonstrative nodding are a dead giveaway. That's definitely Jim Carrey, and he's definitely playing Fire Marshal Bill. 

Whether this was Shadyac's idea or Carrey's one cannot say, but it does seem that Shadyac wanted to prank Carrey at a different point in the film. 

During one of the many trial scenes in "Liar Liar," Fletcher faces off against a lawyer named Dana (Emmy- and Tony-winning actress Swoosie Kurtz). In one moment, both lawyers lose their cool. When Dana raises an objection, Fletcher yells "You would!" Dana yells "Wimp!" Fletcher shoots back with "Hag!" It's a cute moment of comedic childishness. 

In a post-film outtakes reel, after Fletcher yells "You would!," Kurtz yells back "Overactor!" Carrey tries to return with a "Jezebel!," but laughs too hard at the prank. Yes, Jim Carrey overacts. The crew laughs, all seemingly in on the joke. Kurtz laughingly points out that Tom Shadyac put her up to the insult. Carrey hugs her in good humor. "Oh no," he jokingly comments, "they're onto me." 

"Liar Liar" is a puffball of a movie, but its screenplay functions better than it ought to. Plus, at only 88 minutes, it'll be over before you know it. It's no wonder it was a hit.

Read this next: The 20 Most Influential Comedy Stars In Movie History

The post Liar Liar Gave Jim Carrey a Second Sneaky Role That You Probably Missed appeared first on /Film.

Besides being the favorite show of dads and grandads all over the country, "Yellowstone" is also making bank for its creator, Taylor Sheridan, and it's doing so in ways you may not expect. 

It's a given that a hit show is going to do well for the showrunner. We're now in its fifth and final season and that's not counting any of its many spin-offs, including two prequel shows ("1883" starring Sam Elliott, Tim McGraw, and Faith Hill, and "1923" starring Harrison Ford and Helen Mirren) that are released now and at least three others that are in the works: "Bass Reeves" starring David Oyelowo as the title character, the first Black US Marshal, "1944" and "6666." 

That's a whole lot of shows to have your name on as creator, but Sheridan is also making some money on the side by renting out his own ranch property, horses, and livestock to Paramount Studios. The Wall Street Journal did some digging and found that Sheridan was making cash hand over fist (and good for him) by renting his ranch space for $50,000 a week and even renting the productions his cattle at $25 a head. 

That's right, he's renting out cows.

Cowboy Camps And Livestock And Horses, Oh My!

It's mainly the spin-offs that Sheridan is renting out his property to, using his ranches as "cowboy camps" where the actors of his spin-off shows learn how to ride horses and get a firsthand feel for what life on a ranch is actually like. These camps reportedly cost the studio well over $200,000, including $2,000 a head for the use of his horses.

The Wall Street Journal says these expenses might be causing a little bit of friction between the network and Sheridan, but honestly, good for Sheridan. This is an expense they'd have no matter what and if the creator of one of the most popular original shows on television can be the one to provide them, even if it's at a premium price, then so be it.

If there is some grumbling going on between the moneymen, that hasn't bled into the actual productions. Rumored conflicts between Sheridan and "Yellowstone" star Kevin Costner might be the real reason the main show is ending this season, not because the creator is earning some extra scratch on the side. Still, Paramount hasn't slowed down greenlighting these spin-off shows. It feels like there's a new one announced every 6 weeks and the studio wouldn't do that if the shows weren't successful.

The second half of "Yellowstone" season 5 will air later this year, a sequel series is in the works, possibly starring Matthew McConaughey, and season 2 of "1923" with Ford and Mirren is expected to air sometime in 2024.

Read this next: The 15 Best Anthology TV Series Ranked

The post Taylor Sheridan Charges Paramount to Shoot Yellowstone at His Ranch And Rent His Cows appeared first on /Film.

Gmail is starting to show more ads on mobile devices and the web. "Starting on mobile, we've observed that Google is now showing ads within your inbox's 'Updates' filter," reports 9to5Google. "That automatic filter is designed to capture emails regarding orders, select promotions, billing statements, and more. Now, Gmail is starting to show two ads at the top of the 'Updates' tab, just like it does on the other tabs." From the report: Beyond that, it also appears that Gmail is starting to mix its ads on desktop throughout the list of emails under Gmail tabs -- they're at least not showing in the main inbox. Dozens of reports on Twitter show the change just in the past two days, though we haven't been able to replicate it in our own inbox. Some users also report seeing more ads in general, instead of the two that Google would typically show. There doesn't appear to be any new setting to change the placement of ads in the inbox lists, and it's not even clear if this is a change that Google is rolling out to all users. In any case, though, the overwhelming opinion seems to be negative regarding the change -- which is fully understandable.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

[link] [37 comments]

SpaceX has received a crucial Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorization for its Starlink satellite internet constellation. The firm, which has rapidly built the Starlink network and launched more than four thousand satellites to date, nevertheless suffered from high usage in certain areas and low in others even as it rushed to populate orbital shells with the satellites. This led to a degradation of internet speeds for users in North America, but now, it appears as if the internet speeds might improve. The FCC has approved SpaceX's request to increase the transmit duty cycles of its second-generation user dishes after SpaceX submitted data to the Commission outlining that doing so would not violate any radiofrequency emissions regulations.

FCC Approves Massive Transmit Duty Cycle Upgrade For Starlink

SpaceX has been investigating ways to make its Starlink user dishes more potent for quite some time now. The firm first filed an application with the FCC in June last year seeking approval to launch new Starlink satellite dishes. These would feature several upgrades over their predecessors, including a higher transmit duty cycle. In networking, the transmit duty cycle is the time a terminal spends connected and communicating with a transmitting body.

SpaceX's application revealed that the new dishes would have a duty cycle of 14% - implying that they would communicate with the satellites for longer. However, this percentage was later reduced to 10.5% due to changes in the Commission's radiofrequency calculation. Following the application for the second generation user dishes, SpaceX submitted another request to the FCC to test 200 user dishes at higher duty cycles to evaluate their performance.

Keeping up the pace of upgrading its dishes, SpaceX followed these steps with another application in December when it asked the FCC to allow it to increase its duty cycle to 17.5% permanently.

SpaceX submitted this application after testing the Starlink user dishes at the maximum transmit duty cycle of 100% - or in other words, a scenario where they would communicate with the satellites all the time. These tests utilized the flat shape of the second-generation Starlink dishes, and they demonstrated that as opposed to the new rules, which had laid down a maximum duty cycle of 10.5%, the dishes could in fact transmit up to 17.5% of the time, without exceeding any radiation hazard limits.

The FCC has approved the application for the higher duty cycle, which will improve Starlink's performance. The longer duration of the dishes communications period will directly impact the upload speeds for Starlink users. This is because the terminals will spend a more extended period communicating with the satellites; however, the overall speed can also improve significantly since the terminals will be able to make up frequently for information losses between them and the orbiting spacecraft.

Additionally, the longer the dishes communicate, the faster they establish links to newer Starlink satellites. This will reduce switchover times and lead to fewer connection drops. SpaceX has launched more than four thousand Starlink satellites to date. It plans to launch tens of thousands more to gain a foothold in the market that will open soon as Amazon's Kuiper subsidiary secures a rocket and launches its own satellites.

Discord is changing its username system, breaking ties with its hard-to-remember format that combines lowercase and uppercase letters plus a unique four-digit suffix called a "discriminator."

As a company, each year we strive to make our platform the favorite place for both you and your games. With that, we constantly grow, adding more titles to our catalog, gathering more and more gaming enthusiasts (and trying to fulfill their wishes!), spoiling you from time to time with giveaways of games and goodies collections, and constantly aspiring to make your stay on GOG as enjoyable as it can be.

We wanted to share with you how the last year looked in this regard, as well as shed more light on what we’ve managed to achieve in 2022.

Let’s take a look at some facts and numbers!



We are extremely proud and happy that our community is growing, and that so many of you are active both on the GOG.COM store and the GOG GALAXY client. It's a pure joy to have our gaming campfire joined by so many newcomers! With the hope that every awesome game that was added to your library and converted into amazing playing experiences, we believe our community will keep growing and growing.

As you may have noticed, there was a major spike in our net revenue from sales of games in 2020. This was influenced by two main factors – first one being the release of Cyberpunk 2077 (hence the beautiful neon yellow!), the other being the COVID-19 pandemic.
As for the year 2022, despite our decision of suspending sales of all games on the territories of Russia and Belarus in March, we are returning to the stable level of pre-pandemic growth.



When it comes to our market split, we are divided by kilometres (or miles!) but united in our passion. No matter where we come from, what language we speak and in which time zone we are – our love for immersing ourselves in digital worlds remains all the same. And that’s the beauty of video games!



As we’ve mentioned, there are more and more games in our catalog, allowing for those glorious libraries of yours to be even more spectacular with a wide variety of genres. Each year we release more titles than the year before, and do our best to fulfill the Community Wishlist votes. More choices and new gaming memories to be made – this is the way!

And regarding that, some of the biggest titles that have joined GOG in 2022 come in all shapes and forms. From horror titles, shooters and fighting games to RPGs, strategies and roguelikes – it’s safe to say that there’s something for every taste.



We are also remaining true to our roots and hold a special place in our hearts for classic titles. But how could we not? Their charm, their magic, the nostalgia we feel when we play them and, of course, their impeccable gameplay. Not much can beat the feeling of going back to one of your favorite classics and falling in love with it all over again. And the best part is more and more of them find their forever home on GOG.



While GOG has plenty to offer in terms of different game genres – your overall taste looks like this! This means that you most likely spend your evening sword fighting and casting fireballs, then conquering lands as an army commander, and finally jumping, dodging, blasting, punching and everything in between. So just your typical day on GOG and, as you can see, enjoyed across all generations.

We also enjoy providing you with giveaways of games and goodies collections. It seems like you enjoy it as well – we love to see it, and guarantee more coming your way in 2023!



[Full image]

Finally, we are glad to be there for you and offer support whenever you need it. To continue to do so is, and will be, our priority. After all, when you are happy, we are happy.

We are also present on various social media channels which are constantly growing. Feel free to follow us there and be up to date with everything that is happening on GOG!

So there you have it, our facts and numbers of 2022. We are proud to share them with you, because without you, we wouldn’t be able to achieve them. There isn’t a better, more passionate community than you, and we couldn’t be more grateful to have you. Hope you enjoyed this little insight – let us know what you think in the comments. Have a great one!

As you may know, I'm a pretty big proponent for documenting things that we "see" or find during investigations, and then baking those things back into the parsing and decoration process, as a means of automating and retaining corporate knowledge. This means that something I see once can be added to the parsing, decoration, and enrichment process, so that I never have to remember to look for it again. Things I've seen before can be raised up through the "noise" and brought to my attention, along with any references or necessary context. This makes subsequent investigations more efficient, and gets me to where I'm actually doing analysis much sooner.

One of the ways I do this is by creating simple plugins for Events Ripper, a proof-of-concept tool for "mining" Windows Event Log data for pivot points that can be applied to analysis, and in particular timeline analysis. Events Ripper uses the events file, the intermediate step between normalizing Windows Event Log events into a timeline, extracting pivot points and allowing me to build the picture of what happened, and when, a great deal faster than doing so manually.

The recently created or updated plugins include:

sec4797.pl 
Check for "Microsoft-Windows-Security-Auditing/4797" events, indicating that a user account was checked for a blank password. I'd never seen these events before, but they popped up during a recent investigation, and helped to identify the threat actor's activity, as well as validate the compromised account they were using.

filter.pl 
"Microsoft-Windows-Security-Auditing/5156", and /5158 events; this plugin output is similar to what we see with ShimCache parsers, in that it lists the applications for which the Windows Filtering Platform allows connections, or allows to bind to a local port, respectively. Similar to "Service Control Manager" events illustrating a new service being installed, this plugin may show quite a few legitimate applications, but it's much easier to go through that list and see a few suspicious or malicious applications than it is to manually scroll through the timeline. Searching the timeline for those applications can really help focus the investigation on specific timeframes of activity.

defender.pl 
Windows Defender event IDs 1116, 1117, 2051, and 5007, all in a single plugin, allowing us to look for detections and modifications to Windows Defender. Some modifications to Windows Defender may be legitimate, but in recent investigations, exclusions added to Windows Defender have provided insight into the compromised user account, as well as the folders the threat actor used for staging their tools.

msi.pl
Source "MsiInstaller", with event IDs 11707 (successful product installation), 11724, and 1034 (both successful product removal).

scm.pl 
Combined several event IDs (7000, 7009, 7024, 7040, and 7045) events, all with "Service Control Manager" as the source, into a single plugin. This plugin is not so much the result of recent investigations, as it is the desire to optimize validation; a service being created or installed doesn't mean that it successfully runs each time the system is restarted.

appissue.pl 
Combined "Application Hang/1002", "Application Error/1000", and "Windows Error Reporting/1001" events into a single plugin, very often allowing us to see the threat actor's malware failing to function.

Each of the new or updated plugins is the result of something observed or learned during recent investigations, and allow me to find unusual or malicious events to use as pivot points in my analysis.

We can do the same things with RegRipper plugins, Yara or Sigma rules, etc. It simply depends upon your framework and medium.

[link] [14 comments]