You're presuming that the empire wants her to survive

The loose ends aren't secret plot twists. They're just bad writing.

And what about her sister?

What sister?

Her sister died attacking First Order ships.

oh right at the start

Siblings dont have to support the same cause

Paige
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rose_Tico

dude stop

Just. Bad. Writing.

I cant remember, was that a story she was telling?

No, they spent several minutes focusing on the sister.

She mentioned if off hand at one point

cause what if it actually turned out.. that ter sister was on the death star or something

"killed by terrorists"

no they very clearly showed her dying

she was on the last bomber

but was that a scene... or was she telling the story and then it went into the scene?

no that was a scene

at this point you hadnt even met miss plumber comissar

ah yeah I remember... and then something about a necklace

thats it

unless... her sister was a spy too! 😛

cos their parents were on the death star

Literally the only plot hole that this fills in is the part where she crashes finn out of the way of the massive cannon

maybe kylo ren is her brother

That's not a plot hole. That was a conscious decision on the part of the writers.

Every male lead is stupid. Everything they do is pointless or downright wrong, and the female leads are meant to show them the error of their ways.

Finn, by trying to do something heroic and self-sacrificing, was wrong. The writers wanted that to be the lesson.

Yea im gonna consider that a plot hole

I refuse to believe that any studio could conciously decide that was a good idea for a movie

not sure if thats true... the feminist haired woman seemed fairly stubborn etc... but came through in the end

By a) not telling her subordinates what she was trying to do and b) breaking the SW universe.

Why didn't the rebels just evacuate a medical frigate and get a droid to crash it into the death star?

She assumed command and saw the discontent brewing amongst her crew

Instead of taking action to forestall it she chose to sit by and do nothing

Then at the end she made the wonderful decision to sacrifice herself, leaving the alliance without a fleet and without any leaders

But the important thing is that Poe was wrong about everything.

All that heroic stuff that we expect from dashing pilot male leads? Completely wrong.

"you cant solve your problems by jumping in an X wing and blowing everything up"

Worked pretty frigging good for the first trilogy.

Worked good for the first movie and the first part of the last jedi too

But that's toxic masculinity. This time we're going to try losing all our ships and getting 90% of the rebels killed.

Finn? Wrong about everything. Poe? Wrong about everything. Luke? Wrong about everything.

Han? Wrong. Dead. Chewie? Vegetarian now.

thats meritocracy talk - in the new world order - everyone is equal - lowest common denominator

no heroes, no villains

Yeah they couldn't even make a good villain.

how coo would it have been to see an old and crazy powerful luke

rey makes it back to the island and luke is doing crazy force shit

General Hux was a caricature. Snoke was just pointless. Kylo isn't even a villain. He's a love interest.

im never going to see another star wars for one reason

TLJ killed the storyline

Star Wars to me is the original trilogy and nothing more. Everything beyond the unedited first three movies was a mistake.

That wouldve been awesome, to have something to show luke's years of experience

I kept hoping for that right up to the moment he died

Thought he was going to block all the lasers or pull rocks to build a wall as he was being shot at

maybe they could have a dearth vader droid - that can somehow take jedi's abilities to use the force for itself

Anyway, they don't need Luke. They have Leia. She can apparently fly and come back from the dead.

And Rey is so strong she doesn't even need lessons.

Im not really sure where the storyline will go from here

It doesnt even seem like the rebels have a chance anymore

No republic, no allies, no fleet, no leadership

I imagine it will be something about her parents

I don't even want to see it. My friends will drag me to it and I'll have to smile and try not to ruin their fun.

I heard they're trying to get a role for Lando somehow.

but hes an iky man ... far too much toxic masculinity already

Lando has privilege points now.

I really dont want to accept that explanation for the writing, yet I cant think of any evidence that contradicts it

Perhaps solo will have some male positive actions in it

Well, you have Finn and Poe left. Finn is mostly characterized by running away and being wrong. Poe is mostly characterized by disobeying and getting people killed.

Poe is pretty much guaranteed to die.

He has no love interest, no real reason to be kept around. His death would be a useful plot device.

So they could have him do something self-sacrificing, or have him die due to betrayal.

But he's a dead man walking.

And Finn's role in the next film is to realize that he's only infatuated with Rey and actually loves Rose. And he'll show this in some climatic scene by repeating the words Rose told him at the end of TLJ.

wait rose is trans in canon?

I think he was joking, but who knows at this point.

The surname of the actress is Tran

i dont actually think she should have been harrassed for this movie, its easy to blame the actors for the way a movie is but its not correct

Of course she shouldn't be harassed.

i believe the director/writer should be HEAVLY critisized till the day he dies, but also not harrassed

The people doing the harassing are extremely immature and are basically throwing a childish tantrum because they can't think of a constructive outlet for their anger.

There's nothing wrong with being angry that something you love is being ruined, but it needs to be channeled in a constructive way. Tons of people have produced videos or written articles explaining all the problems with the movie, and that's completely legit.

But harassing someone who had basically no hand in causing the problem? Completely stupid.

This is the problem with the internet. It is not harassment she was getting. If 10,000 people each decide to send you a message telling you what a prick you are, you are not being harassed. It seems like it from your end but from the people sending the message they have only sent one message. Any ideas on how the square that circle?

Don't use your real life identity online? Dropping pseudonymity from the internet was a mistake.

That's not going to work if you are already in the public eye and even if you are anon have a tirade of ppl sending you messages can make your accounts nearly use able.

Perhaps develop a thicker skin?

Basically.

Not allow the opinions of random people on the internet to influence your state of mind/opinions on things?

If you're putting yourself out in public with millions and millions of people looking at you, then you need to be able to deal with the fact that at least some of those millions are assholes.

If you can't deal with that, don't go online with your real identity.

Given the population of the world and internet connectivity, you probably have to be willing to put up with at least a million people hating your guts

Especially if you're a public figure or celebrity.

The whole point of pseudonymity is protection. Protecting your real life from online assholes.

Now that we've abandoned that paradigm in favor of using your actual identity online, you can either learn to deal with assholes yourself, or get censorious.

there is an actual problem here that isint as simple as "if you cant stand the heat stay out of the kitchen"

though this problem might be older than the internet

I understand all that and I agree. But if you are a public figure and want a presence online but hundreds on thousands of people hate you, none of individually harassing you but each sending a message you would spend over half your time banning people. Thats not having thin skin thats not having the time to enjoy the net.

Do the messages pop up when you open your browser?

Too bad. Have a separate pseudonymous account for actually using the internet. Have another publicity page managed by your agent.

Do they prevent you from using the internet until youve awnsered each one?

As far as im aware you can freely ignore messages and continue to browse the internet.

before the internet i have to imagine that public figures got hate mail, though probably not in the quantity that they probably get online messages. still your ways of dealing with either the old form of hate and the new form of hate have to be exactly the same, as they are the same thing in principle dispite different quantity and media form. however, are people who are assholes completely absolved of their actions dispite only being individuals who have all their attention pointing in the the same direction? people should be strong enough to get over assholes, but at the same time assholes are bad

If you think that a celebrity can actually have an account on Twitter or Instagram or whatever where they just act like a regular normie jackoff and not have an experience different from joe blow, you're nuts.

but they may want to be normal

Like should Trump expect that his Twitter is going to be free of harassment?

theres a difference between a politician who has control over life and death of millions compaired to an actor

I disagree, but what about Kanye then?

you disagree? how can you disagree?

Should he be able to post his thoughts on social media without getting dogpiled?

its a different job

its so different that the comparison is mindboggling

its like apples to dogs

Because if celebrities must be kept safe from negative comments, these social media companies are going to have to invest heavily in censoring technology.

Humans won't be able to handle the job.

A small time actor will not have a money to have someone manage their account and yes it can stop you from using the net. You have to read a mesage to work out if you want to ban that person. Therer come a point where you are spending more time blocking ppl than have a convocation.

now were discussing something different

No, we're not. If you're a celebrity you're an idiot if you're associating your real name and identity to a social media account you actually intend to use for personal use.

And if you don't intend to use it for personal use, then you have to expect to receive criticism.

What about the account you set up to talk to your fans?

You're going to get hate.

You have to learn to deal with it.

theres a difference between criticism and insult

Too bad. The internet isn't a nice place.

The only way to turn the internet into a hugbox is powerful machine-driven censorship.

your responce to the problem is "i like the way things are and anyone who has a problem with the way things are legitiment or not can fuck off" its not a very useful responce

Because this isn't a problem.

it is a problem

You do have the right to insult someone

its older than the internet

If I go down to speaker's corner and say stuff that people don't like, I can expect a crowd to yell shit at me.

You do not have the right to make them listen to your insults

It's not a bug. It's a feature.

The only way to prevent the crowd yelling shit at me is censorship.

The crowd is just bigger online.

the internet for these people is like a place where to expose themselves as who they really are requires them to be exposed to mobs, mob sized quantitys of both praise and hate. its like walking down the street to the groscery store while being followed by thousands of people cheering and booing constantly and your responce is "the only way to solve this (and i would even take the time to consiter any other solution) would ruin everything so this person has to suffer the consaquences of the system"

They can make a pseudonymous account. They do not have to use their real identity.

how fun

What is your proposal?

i havent gotten to one yet, ive been to busy pointing out how giving up on finding a solution isint a solution

^^

its simply the status quo until something better comes along

"something better" is probably going to be some form of machine driven censorship, because how else are you going to prevent people from saying what they want to say to a public figure on social media?

some bot will detect an insult and shadowban you. the celebrity gets to bask in a sea of only positive comments.

something better is subjective i can conceed but i leave something better into the hands of universal acceptence to actually agree on an preposed idea that is actually good and not just seemingly good to one group of people. your seemingly good is also subjective and only applicible to people who think the same as you, its just that i believe your idea of doing nothing is better than doing worse. im open to doing better though. however my argument has been more toward not presuposing that someone your talking to who is looking for a solution will only assume a solution that you dont agree with and is the solution you assume is the only one they can come up with before they have even postulated one

i think one big problem is that these ppl seem to think that the only way to deal with the shit is to delete their account, when we all know that if you give it a few weeks it will die down and ppl will of moved on and any coming after that should be easier to manage.

wow that was a lot of words to say you don't know

you have a career in politics ahead of you

i have a spelling learning disability, not a vocabulary learning disability

hahah

dont assume they are the same thing

There are bascially two solutions to any problem: top down or bottom up

and it would also help to think about what someone is talking to you about rather than just coming up with a way to downplay them, even if your losing an argument

in this case top down would be instituting some sort of automated block or censorship feature

bottom up would be teaching people better ways to express their displeasure./encouraging more productive conversation

But sometimes you just want to call someone a cock and be done with it.

just 40 thousand people calling you a cock just one time is kinda sucky

I would hate the idea that everything I'm reading that has been sent to me has been through a fillter to get rid of the narsty. I'd need a way to let every tenth or so through if it was getting that bad.

I bet it does. this is the problem innit.

its kind of the bike cuck meme. you got 40k hatemail but it did make one person 1 message happier, so thats ok right?

i got 40k messages of hate mail and i was pretty bummed about it

but then i thought that those people who sent the hate mail were happier to send it than I was sad to get it

so

whatever

The birds have started singing, time to get some beauty sleep. night.

When the birds are up you know youve been up too late

see what MIGHT be a ok middle ground, though personally i prefer perhaps an education system that doesent both generate people who think they deserve constant praise and also people who think that the best thing to do when they dont like something that doesent actually have a direct effect on their livelyhood is to send people shit in the mail. but if theres a top down solution, id prefer that solution be opt in insted of a sweeping censor machine that monitors all interactions on a platform. the idea would be something that acts like a mail reader, or like how to post office checks your mail for anthrax. but its something you choose to use rather than something that everyone has forced on them

see i dont think the problem is that top down solutions exist, people have used top down solutions since people had self awareness. but the issue is that these few people who have problems with the system, and i do think their problems are legitament, have solutions implamented for them that effect millions of people at the same time who dont care or even know whats happening at the time

infact this may already exist, if so and this actress chose not to use it then yeah there's no helping them

if it doesent already exist then i think it should. yes when companys create algorythmic machines they do tend to use them on everyone, but THATS the problem, that implamentation takes a tool to solve a problem for some people and makes it a chore for all people in the world to have to deal with

The post office does that at great time and cost because it is a public safety issue. It may literally save someones life.

This is trying to stop peoples feelings from being hurt.

What you are seggusting is literally a sweeping censorship machine that will have to monitor all traffic on the platform.

It will have to monitor all traffic from all users because if someone opts into the program, and still gets hate mail theyll make a public stink about it.

didint i just say it WASENT a sweeping cencorship machine?

it doesent censor, it blinds

thats a good line, i cant wait for dictatorships around the world to start using it

no thats litterally the idea of how it works

China doesnt censor information about the tienamen square massacare to its citizens, it just blinds them to it

The information is still out there they just cant see it

they dont get the option to opt in because they arnt given the option to opt out

So this has to be a two party opt in system?

how about i just discribe it in detail

both the sender and receiver of the message have to opt into the system for it to work?

Let me guess, insulter sends a message and they see it as sent, everyone else can see it but the person they sent it to or that it mentions if it does so in a negative way sees something different or nothing at all

as far as the rest of the world is concerned the message still exists, but the intended target is none the wiser

basicly the idea is a bot that only functions AT ALL when you choose to use it that filters through things on whatever platform your on and you chose what you want and dont want to see, and that bot then hides information from YOU and only you and no other person but you

so in order to have this work you would need to do two things every minute of everyday

1- Monitor who has engaged the bot and who has not

This would require tracking every user on the network to know if they have or have not opted in

2- Track all information sent and received over the platform

Anyone can harass you at any time, so all of your incoming messages have to be read Additionally they have to look at what everyone else is sending to their friends because you dont want to see a tweet talking down to you get 100000 retweets. You want that blocked.

i supose were using twitter as a bases. btw are you a programer? because your idea of how this would work is a bit archaic

twitter already does this, it just applys it to everyone

with its filter system

basis*

I assume so, unless you would like to invent a new platform and do this

honestly the more complex thing about this idea is already the part they are currently working on which is creating an algorythme that understands what its doing, which it currently doesent, however the aplication of censorship or filtering isint difficult technology anymore

Oh no its not, if a government can do it then companies should have no problem doing so

this bot wouldent need to track all users who are using the bot, dont even know why it would, all it needs to do is run through the html as it loads for you and hide anything that youve set it to hide. and thats a very simple and not even practical method which wouldent work over the entire internet so id more so suggest propriatary bots that utilize the code each website engine uses in order to do basicly that very same task.

twitter has more or less already layed the groundwork for how the gui for it would opperate with its native filters like that thing you sometimes see looking at a thread where the older tweet doesent seem to exist but when you click on it it then loads and shows you the tweet. thats basicly how this would opperate but only you would see it

twitter isint going to do that though and neither is any company because they like the idea of social engineering and are trying to play the long game where they have monopolized audiences where they have full control over what people see so that they can use it for whatever they want, sell it to companys, advertisment selection, propagandizement, sky is the limit for control over groupthink

their only going to change when they are forced to

I assumed that if it was a bot it was a third party program and not something loaded into user's interface

But yes you are correct about twitter's outlook and methods

it could be third party but it would work a lot better being prapriatary

working with just the front end code, its posible to do because pretty much all websites use relitively the same front end to display information that you can also do anything with, websites like twitter being the most simplistic, however back end is always more useful AND if twitter was actually altruistic (they arnt) they would make it more well known and when people had complaints directly to twitter they would be able to suggest it rather than doing the bullshit they usually do

im also working on the idea of us living 3 or 4 years ago before twitter was pulling all the algyrythmic ai censor bullshit and insted chose to go in a different less extreme direction. back then a 3rd party could have even came out with this and then twitter could have scooped them up and used them. like candid

insted of where candid was a censor bot this would be more of a filter bot in the truer senses of its application

twitter filters are basicly censorship because everyones forced to use a minimum manditory filter that you cant switch off, its just that theres optional ones you can switch on

at this point nothing short of mass migration away from the platform or government intervention will change the direction twitter is going in

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/weird-news/japanese-prime-minister-shinzo-abe-accidentally-tells-women-to-die-9563004.html

Shit news not worth spreading, but news nonetheless.

Now she must commit sudoku

lmaooo

Fucking lel

Actually I had that issue yesterday

Also while reading "shine"

Btw, just saw Trump on japanese TV. Its a whole different prespective

did he look more kawaii?

or no wait, his slogan is "Make Americaneruuu great Againeruuu"

Hahhaja

They were talking about the meetup with Kim

The comments about it in Japanese had me laughing though

What do the nips think of him?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5806103/Respected-MSU-physicist-facing-15-years-jail-sodomizing-basset-hound.html

sweet https://twitter.com/qikipedia/status/1004280639615590400?s=20

@GingaBomber I still don't know. I'll ask about it eventually

But its not exactly a good topic to start a conversation I assume

nice https://twitter.com/Josh_Scully/status/1003996810749173762?s=20

eeeeeep https://twitter.com/jason_koebler/status/1004016860017385477?s=20

Guys

Have you seen this

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/06/voters-recall-judge-in-stanford-campus-sexual-assault-case

?

I am no legal expert but this seems like a own goal to me

doesnt seem like anything happened

this child abuse or no? https://twitter.com/DonutOperator/status/1003475561925238784?s=20

one of the responses goes a bit further... the kid is a brat.. but should the adult have held more restraint?

technically the kid was assaulting him. and if that is the case i think it is, i believe that kid was keying cars or something.

is that possible though... I doubt the kid would be able to hurt him

Some are pretty tough

in the UK you can only use defence if its necessary

Who decides if it is nessesary?

the court

its how they jail political enemies of course

Yeah thats some BS

just like hate speech laws