Undefeated Steak

4 hours ago, Keith Houchen said:

justifying a bit of beak 

Can I request a username change to Undefeated Beak? Don't feel right posting in here. 

I think an accepted four-day work week in the UK is entirely possible within the decade. 

Any business that can measure its employees' work output on performance will be able to have increasingly better insight into the quantity of work produced by each employee. If management can compress 5 days into 4, I'm sure they will, although for the employees that will probably come at the cost of a decrease or at least stagnation in wages for a few years.

Increased automation from 'AI' (loosely used) software will also play a big role in making some services entirely obselete. Chatbots, text and voice, will remove the need for any kind of call service teams, for instance.  

As for the 24/7 supermarkets @Briefcase mentioned, it's now a matter of time before Amazon or similar manages to create a same/next day grocery delivery service good enough that will render the need for 24/7 supermarkets irrelevant.

However, I think by far the biggest point to make here is that a four-day work week would be so beneficial to consumer brands and businesses that I could see a major push for it to happen.

It's an extra day that could be spent browsing Facebook, buying from Amazon or reading news websites. It's a golden ticket for consumer capitalism.

Montana by French Montana might be the best hip hop album I've heard since Yeezus. Really good. 'That Way' is a particularly fun track. 

Aye, I'm with you there Bacon. It's not that I'm against the principal of it at all - it is littering and most city streets are filthy. It's the same as getting a speeding ticket - you know you've done wrong but still get annoyed when you receive the fine.

@Chest Rockwell Do you have any sources regarding that about speed cameras not being profitable? A quick Google search says that 2 million got handed out last year. Rough estimate is that's £200 million revenue in speeding tickets. It can't be costing *that* much to operate them, surely?

Got an on the spot fine for dropping a cigarette in Manchester. £100 or £80 if I pay it straight away. My own fault as I knew the fines were in place and I still have a bad habit of throwing them on the floor. Still a bit gutting to have actually been given it a fine for it though.

1 minute ago, Michael_3165 said:

He is embarrassed by the business and dies to be seen in the same category as other media tycoons. He can't stand the term wrestler Ffs! 

I'm embarrassed by wrestling and I don't even have my name attached to it. 

Isn't Vince's point of view more to do with the fact that trying to get respectable brands to advertise on his programming would be almost impossible if WWE was branded as an old-school wrassling show? 

Wrestling has to be one of the most frowned upon industries on the planet. Vince obviously has a love of wrestling, and his vision of it has for the most part been real-life comic book heroes, larger than life characters. And that's the reason he's made millions off the back of his philosophy. He knows what the masses want. 

I remember the Internet hating the likes of Cena and Batista because they weren't wrestling 60 minute draws every week in front of the Impact Zone, and look at how big they turned out. Two of the most recognisable names in entertainment. 

Vince's mission to create a family friendly product he could offer to the mainstream was always going to upset a core section of the fan base but it's mental to say outright that he hates wrestling. 

5 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said:

He's so in over his head. I still don't understand why he didn't just hire a CEO and go enjoy his billions.

He fascinates me in the same way Vince McMahon always has. Could watch him in these situations for hours. 

Wouldn't surprise me if this is the first video game Vince has seen in 20 years and he's blown away with how good it looks. Only explanation to how it's been allowed to get to this stage of development.

Kids will be out in the streets playing with stacks of unsold copies like they did with cash during the 20's hyper inflation.

7 minutes ago, tiger_rick said:

Why don't people just not buy it? That will send the right message.

The same reason people complain about Raw every week but still spend £100+ a year on the network and buy tickets whenever WWE's in town. For all FIFA gets knocked for rolling out the same game each season can you imagine the backlash if that's what the new FIFA game looked like.

1 hour ago, Accident Prone said:

 

Edit: ignore. For some reason can't delete rest of the post from phone.

Don't think I've laughed more at a thread on here. That ref glitch video has done me in. What a horrendously made game.

Appreciate this isn't top twitter, far from it. Volume up for the full experience.

Not mistaken for a famous person but someone said I looked like them when they used to be on spice. That stuck with me.

The Animals' version of It's All Over Now, Baby Blue is one of the best songs I've ever heard, never mind covers. 

I love a bit of nature - got a little green book to tick off various species of birds I see across the UK.

Finally treated myself to some decent binoculars this year but keep forgetting I have them and so barely use them. 

Few things better than getting my walking boots on and clearing off into the middle of nowhere for a day. 

If it wasn't for Bischoff and WCW, Vince wouldn't have needed to push the WWF along so much in the late 90's and we wouldn't have had the boom period, which is by far the most influential time in wrestling, perhaps ever. Really, nothing much has changed since the turn of the millenium when it comes to the format of the company (and therefore industry as a whole), and the fact that WWE still relies so heavily on performers and inspiration from then demonstrates just how much of an influence those few years had.

I say this as a diehard Heyman fan, but there's no way you can say that he had a bigger influence on the industry than Bischoff did. 

Look at how different the WWF was between 1996 and 1999. It changed more in 3 years than it did in the previous 30. Apart from sticking an extra hour onto Raw and changing the ramps and lighting a bit, not that much has changed since.

Heyman has massively influenced the style of wrestling we've seen since then though. He demonstrated there was a need for more realistic characters and for more emphasis on the quality of wrestling for American audiences.

You can also argue that Heyman almost spawned a sub-genre of wrestling in the indies scene since then.

But Stone Cold, Rocky, all the stuff in the few years up until Wrestlemania 17, none of the would've happened if it wasn't for Bischoff.

The product in the late 90's was so good that it's kept a generation of fans hoping for a repeat of it. Bischoff did more to contribute to that than probably anyone else by a big margin.

11 minutes ago, tiger_rick said:

It's only Alvarez but he suggests that his info is Bischoff wasn't actually doing anything creatively. Original suggestion was that he was just a figurehead to work with Fox and he looks like the fall guy already.

Haven't followed it too much but this seems like the most likely scenario.

I've read that Smackdown lost a million views in a week, and there seems to be a lot of emphasis on SD losing a million viewers. It was the second episode of the show on Fox, and it should be looked at as Smackdown having had a 25% increase in viewership for its debut show on the new channel. More people would have tuned in because of the extra ads and promotion for the show, and to see whether it would be any different.

As for Bischoff going as the fall guy, WWE have a history of this so it's nothing new. I don't know what excuses they'll use when the ratings stay stagnant or continue dropping though.

Watched Ad Astra. What a load of shite that was. Don't know why I expected anything else but I've not seen a more paint-by-numbers film in years. Predictable, boring dialogues, some scenes bordering on cringe-worthy. Avoid.

Watched El Camino last night. Really enjoyable. As Scorch said, it was more of an extended episode of Breaking Bad but that's not a negative. Definitely worth watching if you're a fan of BB/BCS.

You'd think the sign would've seen you with that jacket on.

Glad to see this on here. Twitter's been a delight today.

Ha, I'm guessing I missed the mark by a bit there then.

26 minutes ago, GeronimoJacksBeard said:

Indeed. Being a WWE fan is allowing yourself to be a cuck and kidding yourself that you’re ok with it, because she just needs to get it out of her system for a bit, constantly believing this one was the last time and she’ll realise she wants things how it used to be. The magic you once had will be back ...eventually. Besides, those rare occasions you do actually get to fuck her it’s still pretty incredible. When it’s good, it’s great! But 90% of the time you hate what’s going on, you’re embarrassed and you hate yourself for putting up with it and when you pluck up the courage to confront her about it she just tells you “wins and losses don’t matter!”.

I think the sheer diversity of life forms on earth, and the relative extreme conditions under which they can survive gives strong hope that there is other life out there on planets/moons. However, I don't think we're likely to have any contact with it anytime soon (a few hundred years or so). We might detect evidence of an incredibly advanced civilisation if they were to do something on the scale of destroying a star or galaxy or something, but I doubt we're going to see space vehicles that are anything like what we'd imagine. The scale of the universe is just far too big.

If we think of Newton's work on gravity as the beginning of modern science, then there has only been a few hundred years of what we consider science. There are still people living now who were alive when we thought there was only one galaxy, and now we know there are trillions of galaxies out there. I think people struggle to understand the actual vastness of the universe when discussing whether we'll contact other life forms. The size of our own solar system is almost impossible to compute logically in our minds, and that is absolutely tiny when compared to just our own galaxy, and what's beyond. 

The largest galaxy we've found to date is a billion light years away. To put that into perspective, if we had the ability to communicate at light-speed, it would take billions of years to have the most basic of conversations. "Hey, is there anyone there?" - "Yes, where are you?" - "We're in the Solar System" "We're in XYZ galaxy". Obviously a daft example but it would take 4 billion years for that conversation - the entire the age of our planet. And that's just a hypothetical light-speed chat with a random galaxy, the largest we've found, not the furthest away.

Having said that, it's one of the primary reasons I don't believe we've seen UFO's or space ships. Space ships and UFO's are okay for relatively short distances, but that means they can only be arriving from nearby, so in a local planetary system. It would take an immense amount of energy and power to get something like a space ship to our planet, so I don't think that any life form would come all this way just to get a closer look. If they have that type of technology, basically things that we use but more advanced (which is what most UFO videos tend to lean towards), then they'd surely have the technology to observe us through an incredibly powerful telescope or observatory system rather than wasting energy and resources and massive lengths of time just to whizz around our skies. If they're coming this distance, they're sure as shit landing and making contact with us.

So, if any civilisation is to contact us from far away, it must be done by warping and manipulating the universe itself, through worm holes or teleportation or whatever, which means that they would be so advanced that they're incomprehensible to us as humans - they wouldn't fly a UFO like the ones in YouTube videos through a warping of space-time, and start flying around in front of video cameras. Not a chance.

If you're looking at it in terms of odds and probabilities, due to the sheer number of galaxies out there (trillions), the odds are stacked massively in favour of there been life forms on other planets. In fact, I think in a few hundred years people will look back on our current understanding of the universe and think we were insane for ever thinking we might be the only ones. But I don't know whether we'll have direct contact with other life forms. I think there's a far more higher chance that the human race will become extinct long before we get to the point where we can manipulate galaxies, planets, space and time in a way that we're able to travel across the universe.