US First Lady Hillary Clinton meets Donatella Dini, (architect) Gae Aulenti, Monica Vitti, (neuroscientist and Nobel Prize winner for Medicine and Biology) Rita Levi-Montalcini, Rose-Anne Bartholomew and Sophia Loren during an official visit to Rome on June 3, 1994.
This campaign suggests that KFC gravy is the perfect foundation for smart cocktails. If your stomach can handle it, you can find other videos that present recipes like the Fingerlickin’ Sour and the Gravy Mary.
The agency here is the excellent Mother in London, so I want very much to say this is great, but my reaction is closer to one of confusion and disgust. I can’t imagine the brand is going to pursue this direction for the long term, so I have to assume this is just a big ol’ publicity stunt to get people talking about KFC.
Or maybe KFC gravy cocktails will become a thing. In the era of the Tide Pod Challenge, anything is possible.
Anti-fandom is stronger than it could ever hope to be
Anti-Naruto fandom in recent months has gained a solid foundation of smart and active members, has developed a strong and consistent collection of arguments, its own patterns of stating and defending its territory. More importantly - it developed its own sense of pride. The banners are bright and morale is high. Despite operating in opposition, anti-fandom has gained and displayed creative strength, digging deep into canon material, extracting ins and outs of what we were reading for 15 years, enlightening each other and supporting\ nourishing fanon. If anything, anti-position has shown its rightfulness by surviving so long and growing instead of diminishing. In the situation when people generally slowly drift away from finished story, anti-fandom being so solid only shows that there was and IS real substance to people’s critique of canon.
With recent chapters of Gaiden, including the last one, the anti-fandom has received even more ground to operate. Despite all odds, despite SP and Kishi having all resources to sugarcoat their mutilated canon, antis received complete confirmation for their arguments. And yet, antis never even needed to see dysfunctional families and stagnating world to stand firm. Anti-fandom was established when the story ended, after 700, the moment it became obvious that the development and important plot themes were dropped, the moment the story opened up as a hive of toxic ideas and destructive statements.Anti’s mission was to analyze and denounce bad and harmful writing and their source was 15 years worth of material, not some expectations. It was decided that people with both logic and love for Naruto series have lost in their hopes, including some rational canon-pairing-fans and non-shippers. Yet, through stating their anti-position they have found their solid place that cannot be overrun by hoards of children.
And yet pros act like there is still some kind of competition with winners and losers. They act as if some new material can change anything and prove someone wrong. It is absolutely not how it works. Antis can be proved wrong if their arguments about the whole story are rationally answered. Just pointing at some superficial and - truth be told - controversial panels in new canon goods is not an argument about anything. This is what they fail to understand. Lets be realistic, anti-fandom could never grow so strong if it depended on canon material giving them further and further ground to highlight bad writing, it just came as a surprising bonus. SS, NH, whatever, were supposed to be dipped in honey, it was not hope to see them destroyed that drove us to establish anti-fandom, it was what we already had and rebelled against.
Pros should really understand - there is no more race to the finish.
Simple, clean and really easy style to copy. <- I guess when I say copy some might read it and think I mean that in a bad way. I don’t.
A lot of styles are hard to copy, example matching a lot of patterns successfully. But this kind of things are really easy to copy and hence should be a solid foundation to anyone who wants to dress up smart….after the foundation it’s time to move up and mix more colors and patterns.
The iP1 is a so-called smart gun, also known as a “personalized” or “authorized-user-recognition” weapon. It shoots only if it is within 10 inches of a special watch, activated by the user with a five-digit PIN code for a set period—up to eight hours. The watch, which takes less than a half-second to activate, contains an RFID transponder, whose signal is recognized by a receiver inside the gun, which then unblocks the firing pin.
Though no other smart gun is as far along as the iP1, there are a host of others in development. Some employ RFID, others use biometric sensors (like fingerprint readers), while still others are working on grip-recognition approaches—like the fictional gun James Bond used in the movie Skyfall.
The problem arises, rather, from gun enthusiasts themselves, many of whom fear that smart guns are a step toward gun control, that the technologies are intrinsically unreliable, and that they are being foisted upon gun owners by ignorant do-gooders who aim to ban all guns that lack these features.Such concerns are not pure paranoia. Some people really would like to make these guns mandatory. There are also some genuine technological hurdles to be overcome and some reasonable qualms to be set at rest. For a fingerprint-reading gun, can it be made to work with blood, mud, or gloves on your hands? For an RFID gun, like the iP1, what happens if you lose the watch, or an assailant grabs it away? For any smart gun, what happens if the batteries run out? And just how superior are smart guns to old-fashioned gun locks?
Officially, neither the National Rifle Association nor the main trade group for the domestic firearm industry, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, opposes smart guns. They oppose only “mandates,” each asserts—though it can sometimes be hard to tell from their rhetoric.“Groups with no technical knowledge and who have a political agenda view this technology as a panacea,” says Larry Keane, general counsel of the NSSF. “It’s not as simple as they would like to make it,” he says. “There are significant challenges with marrying electronics and firearms. A gunshot generates a lot of energy and vibration. Guns require lubricants and solvents, which are hell on electronics.”