The first one, the one based on the book, was great and did fly a good deal under the radar. But definitely one of those ones with a core fanbase that evangelized for it and good critical notices. Elsewhere in this discussion Jared Harris's role in Foundation has been mentioned; he's a major, consistent, and excellent fixture in The Terror.
Since they used the book's story already, they made a turn for the series to be an anthology of loosely thematically-similar stories (think American Horror Story). The basic setting of season 2 is Japanese internment during World War II in America, and it's from different writers than the first, and of course isn't adapting the novel anymore. It was much less popular both in terms of viewers and critics.
I'm a little surprised they think the brand still carries enough power to put another original story in there under its name for a season 3. It's also a bit of a double-edged sword: you do get name recognition and some built-in initial audience, but you're also taking on expectations and baggage from the original. This is a factor in season 2's tepid reception, and there have been other similar attempts to slide something unrelated in under an existing banner that backfired: True Detective Night Country comes to mind.
"There is an ongoing incident that will force issuance to be halted."
Feels like they were alerted to some current problem severe enough that "turn it off now" was the right move. Breaking the baseline requirements somehow maybe?
The crawlers for the big famous names in AI are all less well behaved and more voracious than say, Googlebot. Though this is all somewhat muddied by companies that ran the former "good" crawlers all also being in the AI business and sometimes trying to piggyback on people having allowed or whitelisted their search crawling User-Agent, mostly this has settled a little where they're separating Googlebot from GoogleOther, facebookexternalhit from meta-externalagent, etc. This was an earlier "wave" of increased crawling that was obviously attributable to AI development. In some cases it's still problematic but this is generally more manageable.
The other stuff, the ones that are using every User-Agent under the sun and a zillion datacenter IPs and residential IPs and rotate their requests constantly so all your naive and formerly-ok rate-based blocking is useless... that stuff is definitely being tagged as "for AI" on the basis of circumstantial evidence. But from the timing of when it seemed to start, the amount of traffic and addresses, I don't have any problem guessing with pretty high confidence that this is AI. To your question of "who are the customers"... who's got all the money in the world sloshing around at their fingertips and could use a whole bunch of scraped pages about ~everything? Call it lazy reasoning if you'd like.
How much this traces back ultimately to the big familiar brand names vs. would-be upstarts, I don't know. But a lot of sites are blocking their crawlers that admit who they are, so would I be surprised to see that they're also paying some shady subcontractors for scrapes and don't particularly care about the methods? Not really.
On my 9 you get a setting to choose if holding Power gets you the power menu or activates the assistant (I think it defaulted to assistant? I have it set to the power menu because I don't really ever use the assistant.)
It's an urban legend that's floated around in various forms: in some it's an ice cream parlor rather than a store and they pack the vanilla faster, in some it's only the vanilla that gets hand-packed so it takes longer, it's pistachio that takes longer and triggers the problem, or butter pecan.
Snopes covered this one and they cite to an urban legends book from 1989: "Curses, Broiled Again" by Jan Harold Brunvand. Brunvand prints the "vanilla takes longer" version and reports also having a "pistachio takes longer" version printed in a magazine in 1978, which itself referred to another magazine as its source. In the book's version it's a Texas car dealer who's looking into the problem. The same author's later book from 1999 covers the story again and includes versions dating back further, plus a 1992 version which is this one where it's Pontiac and the problem is the vanilla being in a separate case at the front of the store.
In the Pontiac version you can go and pick at various implausible details stacked up together, that Pontiac's president cares enough to send an engineer out, that the engineer is there when the car won't start on the first night but still just comes back many more times rather than looking at the car or presumably noticing that it starts a couple minutes later, that this guy is buying a new container of ice cream every night and never stocking up, that he never takes any other trip where it's a short stop... You can go on each of those and say they do happen: like presidents and CEOs do sometimes go digging deep on random problems customers put in front of them. But if you look at the whole thing I think you need to recognize it as a piece of storytelling, not fact.
Maybe there's some kernel of a true story in there, but if so it's probably a pretty small kernel. Anyway it doesn't matter much: it's just a fun story that teaches a little lesson so people like to share it around.
They haven't been all that aggressive against the decompile/recompile projects, interestingly. They're sometimes/often set up so you need the original to grab assets etc., but that code is copyrighted too and I'd have to imagine a decompile that purposely compiles to an identical binary would be a derivative work.
My best guess is that for them it's not worth the hassle or any possibility of a negative result in court as long as people have to jump through some hoops by providing an original, and for the projects that don't do that, you have very straightforward easy infringement cases without even getting into the decomp stuff. Though really even ROMs seem to be tacitly tolerated to some extent lately. Maybe there's an attitude that keeping people involved with the franchise is worth it, again so long as it doesn't become too easy.
There's a recording from the 80s where he makes the same point in the middle of reciting the poem. It's a really good version.
"A lot of times people see battles and skirmishes on TV and they say 'Ah-ha! The revolution is being televised!' Nah. The results of the revolution are being televised. The first revolution is when you change your mind, about how you look at things, and see that there might be another way to look at it that you have not been shown. What you see later on is the results of that, but the revolution, that change that takes place, will not be televised."
Since they used the book's story already, they made a turn for the series to be an anthology of loosely thematically-similar stories (think American Horror Story). The basic setting of season 2 is Japanese internment during World War II in America, and it's from different writers than the first, and of course isn't adapting the novel anymore. It was much less popular both in terms of viewers and critics.
I'm a little surprised they think the brand still carries enough power to put another original story in there under its name for a season 3. It's also a bit of a double-edged sword: you do get name recognition and some built-in initial audience, but you're also taking on expectations and baggage from the original. This is a factor in season 2's tepid reception, and there have been other similar attempts to slide something unrelated in under an existing banner that backfired: True Detective Night Country comes to mind.
reply