Does Pokemon encourage witchcraft? No, it doesn’t.

pokemon who me

Pokemon has been a popular game, but it’s been quite some time since Pokemon made the news the way it has lately with the release of Pokemon Go.

For many of us today, Pokemon Go doesn’t need much explanation due to its popularity. In summary, it’s a cell phone app in which players move about in real life using their phone to physically travel to different locations to find creatures called “pokemon” that can be battled and added to the player’s collection.

It’s certainly a novel idea, so it’s no surprise that it’s been taking off as well as it has. It’s perhaps also no surprise that there are news stories about people behaving carelessly with the app, considering that the app encourages physically travelling from one location to another.

Pokemon has gotten to be so popular that there are some who are asking whether there is any spiritual danger to playing Pokemon. So, what about that? Is there any spiritual danger to playing Pokemon? Does Pokemon encourage witchcraft?

The answer to both of these questions is, “No, why would you think that?”

The reason why many people think that is because some popular religious figure made a case that was convincing enough for them, and they decided to look no further into it.

As cynical as it may sound, many religious leaders out there treat religion as a business. It is a business that is facilitated by media attention, and because of this, it is conductive to their business to pick on whatever happens to be popular at the time. And at this time, what happens to be the biggest dog in the yard is Pokemon.

There is nothing intrinsically harmful about Pokemon, so accusing it of encouraging witchcraft is a needlessly divisive move. However, its popularity makes it a convenient target for attention getters.

So, is there any harm in waging a baseless accusation if one’s intention is to further the gospel?

The answer to this question is “Yes, and that should be obvious to you.”

This is because you cannot promote the message of the Bible with an act that the Bible condemns. And charging someone with a false accusation is something that the Bible soundly condemns.

Let’s get real, here. Pokemon is a game that was made by a group of people who thought that their ideas would make a great game. It’s their life’s work. It’s something that makes people happy, which is good for people who enjoy the game, and it helps the game makers pay the bills, which is good for them. The game makers should not be accused of promoting witchcraft or any similar accusation, because that was not their intention when making the game. Taking cheap shots against honest people who produce a harmless product is not an action that should be taken to further the gospel.

What’s more, children are not stupid. Telling a child that Pokemon promotes witchcraft is like telling a child that Santa is real. Eventually, the child is going to learn what’s really going on, and they’ll end up trusting the judgement of their parents less.

Santa mask

Waging a false accusation is not a Christian act, and making a children’s game the target of the accusation doesn’t make the act any less harmless.

As of this writing, I haven’t played Pokemon Go. It would probably be a little while before I do. As for false accusations, I’ve been targeted with that kind of thing before, so I don’t have very much patience for it. It’s especially disappointing when religious leaders do it, and it’s petty when they decide to pick on a cell phone game, of all things.

Pokemon vs. Digimon: Why Pokemon wins

pokemon xyz poster

Pokemon is hugely popular. Even today, two decades after its debut, Pokemon continues to be a phenomenon. Even at its lowest point, Pokemon had a fan base tens of millions strong.

Something that popular is bound to see different takes on it, and in Pokemon’s case, there were many. How many people out there remember Monster Rancher? Or Magi-Nation? Or Fighting Foodons? Out of the many Pokemon me-toos, the most popular was Digimon.

When you mention Pokemon and Digimon in the same breath among gamers, you’ll see many of them take sides. Usually, they’ll side with Pokemon. No surprise there, Pokemon is much more popular. But if you ask any of them why they like Pokemon more, you’ll see many of them throw their hands up and say “we just do.” It would seem as though few people truly understand why Pokemon is more popular, as though Digimon were somehow a superior product in every sense, but people have come to a consensus to like Pokemon instead, just because.

However, people don’t like things without reason. Pokemon turned out to be far more popular, even if people don’t know how that came to be. This article explores the reasons why, even though Digimon superficially offers a more interesting experience, Pokemon has won the hearts of many millions more.

One thing that Digimon fans point out is that Digimon offers the better anime.

And in a sense, this is true. Digimon focuses on telling epic stories of adventure and character development. While Pokemon does something similar, Digimon is different in that it tells one or two season long story arcs centered around a cast of characters who are out to defeat some foe that threatens the well being of a world or two.

On the other hand, Pokemon is about Ash and Pikachu, and how they travel from town to town collecting gym badges. After a while, Ash does collect all the gym badges in a region, then participates in some competition before moving on to another region where he collects another set of gym badges. It’s formulaic.

So why? Why does the Pokemon anime consistently get better ratings?

The answer is, because of that formula. It’s a long-term strategy. Sometimes, a person who watches will take a break from it. When they return to it, they expect some familiar concepts and/or characters to have remained in place.

When people think of the Digimon anime, they think about the starring characters, such as Tai, Matt, Agumon, and those other familiar faces. When they take a break from it, they expect those familiar faces to still be there when they come back, because those are the faces that they associate with Digimon. However, if the fan has been away for a long time, they may come back to discover that Tai and Agumon are no longer anywhere to be seen, even though they were once the main characters! As a result, older fans that expected certain characters to remain are alienated.

Tai Agumon missing

When people think of the Pokemon anime, they think of Ash and Pikachu. While characters have left Ash’s group and new characters have been introduced, Ash is still there, and so is Pikachu.

This has been spoken of as though it were some weakness of the Pokemon anime. But in reality, it’s been its strength. Again, sometimes, fans go, but later come back again. Pokemon makes it easier for them, because the two main characters that fans expect to find upon return are still there. Meanwhile fans of Digimon that attempt to return to the show but don’t find the old main characters have to readjust to a new cast, and they may not be up for that kind of emotional reinvestment, especially when faced with the prospect that the new cast may not still be there in a season or two.

So, while the Digimon anime may have better writing, the Pokemon anime wins out in the long run, because it remains consistently Pokemon, whether you like Ash or not.

On to the second point, Digimon fans like to point out that Digimon designs are better. What do they mean by “better”? Apparently, that Digimon are gritty and heavily-detailed.

For a few examples of Digimon designs, check out the following:

digimon trying too hard

Wow. Any one of those guys look like they could kick Mewtwo’s butt. Just how edgy can you get?

But here’s the thing: We don’t really care for that as much as one might think. In fact, the Digimon designs look like someone has been trying way too hard to impress us. That’s something we can see right through, or at least notice on a subliminal level.

While Digimon may try really, really hard to impress us with their terribly edgy designs, they aren’t the only ones that have an edgy appeal to offer. For one thing, gamers adore Castlevania, even though the edginess factor isn’t nearly as blunt. In gaming, it’s not hard to find something that’s been overdesigned to stain our undergarments yellow. In fact, that stuff’s everywhere.

Pokemon’s simpler designs are welcome because they have a wider appeal. A girl can adore a Pikachu because it’s cute, and a boy may find Pikachu interesting because its electrical potential has a connotation of danger. That’s the kind of thing that Digimon doesn’t manage to pull off quite right. That’s especially glaring considering that Digimon originated as a Tamagotchi game. And in any case, the appeal of a wild, edgy character isn’t really as wide as one might think.

One can point out that Pokemon places a lot of emphasis on cuteness. Which it does. That doesn’t hurt it that much, because the cuteness of one pokemon usually doesn’t distract much from its other qualities, such as the strength it has in spite of that cuteness.

Besides, cuteness really isn’t a bad thing. In fact, it’s great that Pokemon has that aesthetic appeal. Pokemon scratches an itch that most other games out there don’t even bother reaching for.

The third point, and perhaps the most obvious is that the Pokemon video games are plainly superior.

There aren’t very many people who argue against this one. That doesn’t mean that Digimon games are bad. There are some good ones.

The main problem is Digimon games usually vary significantly from one installment to the next. While the Digimon World games are RPGs, the original Digimon game for the Sega Saturn was a Tamagotchi simulator. There are those who consider Digimon World to be the gold standard for the Digimon experience, while others favor the Tamagotchis. As a result, there is fragmentation among the fanbase as to what one may expect from a Digimon video game. (Digimon isn’t the only game to do this. The Yu-Gi-Oh video games are very inconsistent as to whether to follow the rules of the trading card games.)

Pokemon games are so similar from one installment to the next, that the pokemon themselves can be transferred from one version to another, allowing players to keep playing with the individual pokemon that they’ve grown attached to as the series progresses.

One can point out that the main series Pokemon RPGs are formulaic, varying little from one installment to the next. A similar point could be made about the Pokemon anime, but if you remember that same point above, you’ll know that that didn’t hurt the Pokemon anime very much at all. As stated above, that kind of consistency can be a real strength.

People who play a certain game usually take a break from it after a while. When they return, they expect those familiar core mechanics to remain intact. This is what makes Pokemon such a friendly game for casual players: it doesn’t alienate players with changes to the experience. In fact, that’s reasonable to expect. The things that make Pokemon distinct have remained.

In light of this, one can understand that Digimon’s dissimilarities from one installment to another is a liability. For a long time, things have been thrown out there to see what sticks. It takes strength to stick to one’s strategy.

For the fourth point, Pokemon is more original. No surprise there, because Pokemon came first, and Digimon was an attempt to copy someone else’s popularity.

Not everyone wants to accept that Pokemon came first. I’ve already written an article proving that to be the case, laying the issue to rest, so I don’t have to get too much into that here.

Still, it’s pretty obvious that Digimon was born in a marketing meeting in an attempt to make some quick cash off of Pokemon’s popularity. While we don’t talk about that very often, enough of us do see right through that, and we don’t like the idea of supporting such a blatant lack of creativity.

To take something and say “Look, we can make it better by making it edgier and more X-treme!” doesn’t earn a lot of respect.

The fifth point is that Pokemon is generally a far more positive experience. And, believe it or not, there’s a lot of demand for that kind of thing.

Think about how many games are out there in which the main character is out to save the world. Some of the sharper readers out there would point out that that’s nearly all of them. It’s a recurring theme in video games: the relatable main character sets out on a quest to save the world from some bad guy or personified evil or abstract concept, gathering items and/or abilities along the way.

Done. So. Many. Times.

The Digimon games are yet another installment about unrealistically-heroic pre-teens saving the world from some evil that threatens to end it in some creatively dreadful way. And to be sure that that point gets across, it beats you over the head with some of the same edgy, overdesigned monstrosities that were previously discussed.

While Pokemon games usually also star kids who save the world, what’s noteworthy is that the tone of the adventures is far different. This is apparent in the settings of the games. The upcoming installments, Pokemon Sun and Moon, have settings based on Hawaii. The setting of Pokemon X and Y was inspired by France. Very nice settings that are very conductive to a positive and uplifting tone (even if France is a tad overrated).

Pokemon games have such an energy and enthusiasm about them, it’s almost as though each game were some large festival that players participate in each time they play the game. They even made some games based on New York City and managed to convey the same positivity. Think about the kind of creativity that would take.

If the idea of your game is to have a main character go on a long journey to save the world, you know how many games you’d be directly competing with that have the same theme? Just about every single one.

Myotismon

That’s what makes it so great that Pokemon at least tries to be different in tone. Pokemon games star kids who want to be champions. Not because anyone is counting on them, but because they want to be good at something. Pretty good idea for a game, right there.

The sixth point is that Pokemon has a far more developed competitive game. This has much to do with the fan base, but it is due in large part to the intrinsic elements of the game, so I think it does deserve a mention.

Pokemon has a much larger, far more developed competitive game. This is interesting considering that, when Pokemon was first made, it wasn’t originally intended to have much of a competitive aspect outside of link battling. While many may be loathe to admit it, the existence of fan communities such as Smogon may have played a large part in the development of Pokemon’s competitive game.

Love it or hate it, Smogon is huge. At first, it provided an online simulator, with simple rules to balance the game more than link cable battles. Mewtwo and Mew were deemed uber, so Smogon didn’t allow them. Over time, things got more complicated, but Nintendo began hosting official Pokemon tournaments with rules very similar to Smogon’s. Perhaps one was inspired by the other, though it’s likely that Nintendo recognized on their own that similar rules were better for the game.

The very fact that competitive communities such as Smogon exist and are as large as they are makes the case that there has been a huge demand for competitive Pokemon.

On the other hand, Digimon hasn’t been doing very much competitively. That’s not to say that they’ve been doing nothing. There have been Digimon tournaments, but they’ve been rare.

When it comes to a competitive Pokemon event, it’s usually either a video game or trading card game event. That’s seldom a problem for someone, because Pokemon fans typically play one game or the other (or both).

On the rare occasion that a Digimon event is held, it might be a button-mashing fest with the Digivice, which not many people own. Or it might be a trading card game event. But which trading card game? Digimon has tried more than one.

digivice button mash

After a while, Nintendo has put more effort into making the Pokemon RPGs more competitively balanced, which has resulted in a better game. That was pretty good news for the many players who wanted Pokemon to have a stronger competitive aspect.

Those are the reasons that are apparent to me why, between Pokemon and Digimon, Pokemon has succeeded in having a much wider appeal. This is not an article on how Digimon is stupid and why people should not play it. If you enjoy a game, that’s a pretty good reason to play it. I wrote this article because it’s not very obvious to many people why Pokemon turned out to be the far more popular game.

Is there a reason that I missed or a counterpoint that you’d like to bring up? Comments section.

Is Call from Mighty No. 9 secretly a Powerpuff Girl?

Call_Artwork

Pictured above is Call, a character from the recently-released Mighty No. 9 (released in 2016).

While many people are aware of a Cartoon Network cartoon known as The Powerpuff Girls, what isn’t so widely known is that there was a short-lived anime adaptation of the show called “Demashitta! Powerpuff Girls Z” (released in 2006, and yes, that’s what it was called). The show lasted for two seasons with 52 episodes, and was criticized for (among other things) that the adaptation was too far a departure from the original show. The show incorporated Majou Shoujo genre elements including transformation, though the theme of the show was science, not magic.

The following is a screen capture from the show, showing one of the three main characters (both the people shown are the same character). Shown in front is Momoko Akatsutsumi, and in the background is her alternate persona, Hyper Blossom.

Akatsutsumi.Momoko.full.427928

Notice any similarities?

A flag for abortion activists.

Abortion activists are celebrating in the streets after the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law. They certainly seemed to find it a great day to be alive. However, there doesn’t seem to be an official flag to represent abortion activists. If they had such a flag, they could wave it around each time they reach a milestone.

And, appropriately enough, the abortion movement is reaching a very special milestone. As of 2012, the number of abortions performed in the United States is estimated to be over 51 million.¹ This is closing in on 56 million, the lower end of Dyadkin’s estimate of the number of people killed by the Soviet Union.²

Therefore, it seemed appropriate that the abortion movement’s flag be modeled on the Soviet flag, with a slight modification to reflect their intrinsic values:

abortion flag

Instead of a hammer and a sickle, this new flag has a scalpel and a suction tube. Doesn’t that just say it all?

Citations:
1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States (Yes, it’s Wikipedia. Turn your nose up, if you must.)
2) http://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people-did-joseph-stalin-kill-1111789

EDIT: While doing research for this article, I visited a page for International Business Times. The following screen capture shows the video that automatically loaded with it, with the title of the article just above it:

appropriately enough, this was the video that loaded

Appropriate, isn’t it?

To Zoe Quinn: Why does everything have to be about you?

At E3, Nintendo showed off one of their new software titles, Paper Mario: Color Splash. There was an in-game event which depicted five mushroom men who were called the “Five Fun Guys”, and another character chimed in with the punchline, “Shufflegate: Exposed!”

Zoe Quinn took notice, and believed it to reference Five Guys Burgers and Fries and the Gamergate movement that she herself inadvertently set into motion, and she posted the following to her Twitter feed:

Zoe Quinn shufflegate

To be fair, she did eventually recognize it as a coincidence, and stated so in a Twitter post in an attempt to defuse the situation (short of apologizing to Nintendo, her Twitter followers, and of course Gamergate). However, it was her eagerness to be triggered by this “coincidence” that’s problematic.

Here’s the thing: it wasn’t a coincidence. The routine did reference a real-life event. It’s called the “Watergate” scandal. In the events surrounding the scandal, five men were implicated on suspicion of burglary. Because it was so prominent as a scandal, the “-gate” suffix appends the names of many scandals.

Zoe Quinn and many people who identify as feminists have an apparent inability to recognize an actual coincidence. They actually believe that there is some huge, concerted conspiracy to keep them down. It’s gotten to the point that some of them have criticized the Voyager 1 plaque for depicting the woman as standing behind the man, while the man’s hand is raised in a show of strength. As opposed to, say, offering a friendly greeting?

Pioneer 1 plaque man and woman.png

From here, it looks more like the woman is standing side by side with the man. If anything, the only disservice done to the woman is a refusal to draw her vulva. If aliens find the thing, they’re going to wonder how we reproduce. It’s not like drawing a vertical line on a woman’s groin is going to cause extraterrestrials to dismiss the plaque as pornographic. Notice how the woman’s left toes reach slightly lower than the mans? From the front-on perspective, that would indicate that she’s standing slightly in front of him.

Zoe Quinn, like many feminists, has a reduced ability to recognize something as a coincidence, or at least as a reference to someone or something besides her. Neo-feminists get angry over things because they want to be angry, and they like being angry, because they want to feel justifiably indignant over anything that they can. They may get indignant, but they don’t get to enjoy legitimate justification, because they seldom know what’s actually going on. When they make knee-jerk reactions over every perceived slight, they make themselves look silly. They look silly because they think everything is about them. And yet, they don’t ask why. And that’s a question that neo-feminists need to hear:

Why does everything have to be about you?

And while we’re asking questions, here’s another one: Why not use your head? If there were a random chance that you’d have been born as any organism, you’d have been far more likely to have been born as an ant, because there are approximately one million ants for every human being alive today. There are far more animals besides them. My point is, think about what a privilege it is to be a human being, which has the most capable brain out of any animal we know about. We possess the magnificent potential to do things like send plaques depicting naked people into space, and in spite of this, we have knuckle-draggers treating stupid behavior as an indulgence and delegating their thinking to advertisers. You have the potential to do better, so why don’t you?

At one point, Zoe Quinn wanted to be known as a game developer. That’s a pretty meaningful thing to do for a living. However, she gave up any respect she would have gotten for her endeavors when she turned her back on her fellow gamers and turned the already-corrupt trade of games journalism against the very people they were supposed to inform. That comes with a lot of guilt for just one person to deal with, but Zoe Quinn brought it upon herself, and she made matters worse for her refusal to confront it.

That’s really how the Gamergate movement got started to begin with. Zoe Quinn so insisted on playing the victim, that she betrayed the very people she so strongly wanted to be accepted by. Having to deal with that can drive a person crazy, and when it gets to that point, a person can easily mistake a joke in a Mario game as being directed against them.

I want more GMOs.

Screen-Shot-2014-06-23-at-6.20.17-AM

source: geneticliteracyproject.org

Some overly-nervous wuss-bags are afraid of genetically modified organisms, likely because there were too many words in it with more than two syllables, and because someone said it to them with a spooky, mysterious-sounding voice while waving their fingers around. So they shortened it to “GMOs” so that they’d be able to say it, then they pushed to have them banned.

When I say “GMOs”, I’m not talking about mixing broccoli with cauliflower to make some combined vegetable. What were you guys thinking with that? Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. What I’m referring to is food that has been genetically altered, while still retaining its identity as its specie.

Apples are great, but do you know what’s better? Apples that are even better than other apples at being apples. That’s just what genetic modification does. If there’s an apple that’s bigger, supplies more nutrients, and helps drive mosquitoes to extinction, that’s an apple that I want.

Those who are primarily pushing for banning GMOs are the usual suspects: vegetarians, scam dieters, fad theologians, and conspiracy theorists. One thing you notice about them pretty quick: in spite of their efforts, they usually try desparately to not be so fat or so skinny, but it’s obviously not going well for them.

One of the reasons why I outcompete anti-GMO wimps is because my food outcompetes their food. And my food probably outcompetes them, as well.

Anti-GMO wimps lead you to believe that if you eat GMOs, you’ll get sick. But here’s the thing: they never point to a study to prove it (that’s not discredited, in cases when they try). There’s a reason for that: GMOs do just the opposite.

In the year 2007, a team of British scientists genetically modified chickens to produce eggs that can treat skin cancer, arthritis, and multiple sclerosis.¹ Eggs that can treat cancer? Alright! It’s too bad that vegans aren’t going to have any.

While humans that are great at being humans are finding treatments for cancer and implementing them into our food, anti-GMO wimps are pulling an anti-vaxxer and trying to ruin things for the rest of us.

We’ve been genetically modifying our food since before we knew what DNA was. This occurs when we reject food sources with unfavorable attributes and instead grow or raise what’s appealing to us. Now that we know what DNA is, we can now be more intricate in making food that better serves us. Because when it comes to food, what humans primarily consider is how that food benefits humans.

And on that note, you can choose between the super apples that make all other apples look laughable in comparison, or you can choose the scrawny, undernourished apples that don’t look like they could last a minute in a cage fight with the other apple. Most people would choose the super apple, then immediately reap the rewards of a choice well-made. But there are a few people who would choose the scrawny apples, then later wonder where their lives went wrong.

But just because they have no idea what’s going on doesn’t mean that anti-GMO wimps aren’t going to attempt to make choices for everyone else. This is one of the reasons why I’d rather see lawmakers that know a few things about science. Otherwise, they might end up banning something that could make life better for everyone.

Citations:
1) http://www.sustainableamerica.org/blog/gmos-that-prevent-cancer/

Mighty No. 9 is a mighty disappointment.

Mighty No. 64.png

I haven’t purchased or played Mighty No. 9, so my perspective of the matter is one of being on the outside looking in. At this point, however, I’m not planning on buying it. I know well enough from my vantage point that Mighty No. 9 has proven to be a serious disappointment. It may even turn out to be the biggest disappointment in gaming this year. Yeah, that bad.

At first, it seemed as though Mighty No. 9 was going to usher in a new age in video game funding; an age where the risk in funding blockbusters is removed because games are funded by gamers themselves who are interested in seeing the project come to fruition. Better yet, the project was funded by the legendary Keiji Inafune of Mega Man fame, and the project was to be the spiritual successor to the Mega Man series. With that kind of star power, there was a lot of potential.

However, attitudes toward the project soured as more and more drama unrolled during the development process, which included someone with very little gaming background being appointed to an important position on the staff because she happened to be someone’s girlfriend.

One would imagine that if anyone would know what it takes to make a great Mega Man game, it would be Keiji Inafune. Therefore, one would also imagine that he knew what it would take to make what was intended to be its spiritual successor. However, just about everything that made Mega Man great is missing from Mighty No. 9, right down to Mega Man’s charm.

Mighty No. 9 managed to raise $4 million from its Kickstarter campaign. Where did that money go? It certainly didn’t go into making the game look polished, as the product looks at least a couple generations behind. It didn’t seem to go into the music, either. That’s a shame, because Mega Man had great music. When a game has a good soundtrack, that can be a selling point for me.

So, what happened?

Personally, I suspect that Inafune got greedy. He knew that his own name, considered legendary among gamers, would be all that it would take to sell games. He already had the four million dollars that he raised from his Kickstarter campaign, and the additional money that he’ll rake in from sales will be icing on the cake. If there was a time for him to cash in his legacy with a game that was hyped to the point that it could hardly live up to expectations, even if a monumental effort were put into it, this would be it.

So, what did we learn? Hopefully, what gamers have learned is that if someone is demanding huge amounts of money for a project and has little to no obligation to deliver a product that’s substantial in quality, that might not be a very good investment. Granted, at least in this case, a finished product came out of the deal, unlike with Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes project, which she just about abandoned even though it was well behind schedule, and wasn’t anywhere close to completion (though she kept the money anyway).

If it weren’t for the runaway success that is Undertale, it could be said that Mighty No. 9 killed the era of supporting major game releases through crowdfunding. But there is another thing we can take away from this. And that is that just because we put someone on a pedestal and consider them a hero, doesn’t mean that they won’t disappoint us.

Did the Pokemon Company make a Donald Trump pokemon?

Yungoos

Take a gander at the pokemon pictured above. Its name is Yungoos. Does it bear a resemblance to someone who has been appearing in the news a lot lately?

Pokemon games typically feature a Normal-type pokemon that isn’t very strong on the very first route. The first generation had Rattata, the second had Sentret, and so on. It looks like the seventh generation’s Rattata is based on Donald Trump.

Don’t believe me? Check out that hair. Then, if that weren’t enough, check out that determined grimace. See it yet?

Also, check out the flavor text that goes with this pokemon:

Yungoos is a big eater that is never satisfied. The majority of its long body is given over to its stomach, and its digestion is swift, so it’s always hungry.

So, what’s the joke, here? If Yungoos is based on Donald Trump, then this bit of text suggests that this Donald Trump pokemon is greedy. In a somewhat similar fashion, Donald Trump has a reputation as an aggressive entrepreneur that shows little sign of satisfaction.

But that’s not all. There are more hints in the flavor text:

Yungoos is not a Pokemon that is native to the Alola region.

Donald Trump’s grandfather was a German immigrant. And there’s more:

It was brought to the region to help deal with the explosive population of a certain other Pokemon, and now Yungoos are commonly seen around the Alola region.

Of all things, Trump’s strong stance on illegal immigration got a reference. But I do feel a little curious. What is the identity of the pokemon that Yungoos was brought in to “deal” with?

I don’t really expect Yungoos to become the official mascot of the Trump campaign, but I can imagine Trump supporters putting this thing on a campaign sign. Actually, that kind of thing is much easier to imagine with image editing software:

trump supporters pokemon yungoos

If its evolved form is a Hillary Clinton pokemon, that would ruin it.

Where’s the Fair Use? We still have to fight for it.

If you use YouTube a lot, you’ve likely come across a number of videos that exclaim “WTFU”, or “Where’s the Fair Use?”. This is because on social media, there are many wrongful copyright claims that have the effect of stifling the expression of opinions.

A fresh example of this is the recent removal of a video by Steven Crowder, in which he explained why Democratic Socialism doesn’t work. The video was removed from YouTube at the request of Mashable, with the claim that Crowder’s use of portions of their video was a violation of their intellectual property rights.

Here is a video of Crowder’s opinion on the matter (Trigger Warning: Steven Crowder is a Conservative comedian. If you’re an SJW or similarly weak-bladdered, you might be exposed to an opinion that is not your own):

In American law, there is a legal protection called “Fair Use”. Fair Use allows for the limited use of copyrighted materials for educational, review, or satirical purposes without being considered to have broken copyright law. Crowder’s video, like those of many other YouTube personalities, falls nicely under Fair Use.

So, what’s the problem? The doctrine of Fair Use is being ignored, that’s what.

It gets worse when you consider that YouTube’s policy on copyright claims is horribly flawed. When a copyright claim is made on a video, the channel that uploaded it gets a strike on its account. Strikes can be contested, but the uploader is faced with the burden of proving that they didn’t violate copyright law, instead of placing the burden of proving that a violation of copyright law occurred on the one filing a complaint, which is right where it belongs.

It gets worse. When a copyright claim is made against a channel, any money that the video would have made the uploader goes to the person making the claim until the claim is resolved. Even once it’s resolved, the person making the complaint doesn’t have to pay it back. Because of this, there are people who abuse the system by making false complaints to make some money for themselves. As of this writing, they actually get away with it.

And it gets worse, still. Once a channel has three strikes, it’s deleted. The whole channel.

That’s a catastrophic blow for a channel that has gone big. Channels that have over 100,000 subscribers can easily make the account owner as much money as a minimum wage job. For some people, their YouTube channel is their livelihood.

As you’ve likely already gathered, a person doesn’t need to be the copyright holder to file a copyright complaint. On YouTube, false copyright complaints are rampant. In many cases, as is the case with Steven Crowder’s video, a false allegation of copyright infringement can be filed in an attempt to silence an opinion that they don’t like. Sometimes, a company will file a copyright complaint in order to remove a review that might hurt the sales of their product, even if it’s obvious that the copyrighted material has been used in a manner consistent with the allowances afforded by Fair Use.

So, what can we do about it? On the one hand, you could do as Doug Walker did and make a video pleading for the administration of good, decent sense:

Look at those puppy eyes! Don’t you see that all this copyright abuse is making him sad?

Yes, you can be another messenger in a world full of messengers that are easy to ignore because most of them won’t actually do anything proactive about their problems.

On the other hand, you can do something about it. Because when it comes down to it, most problems don’t go away by themselves, even if almost everyone is aware of them. Sympathy posts to attempt to bring attention to a matter are usually pleas to have someone else do the work.

So, what can we do about it?

Phoenix Wright lawyer up

That’s right, lawyer up. If someone makes a false copyright allegation against one of your YouTube videos, take them to court, win, and in so doing, establish a legal precedent that would serve as a deterrent against anyone who would attempt the same thing.

You would have the law on your side. According to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), filing a false DMCA claim is punishable by up to five years in prison. Of the Federal variety.

I’ve seen videos begin or end with splash images claiming that the limited use of copyrighted materials in the video falls under fair use. If you really want to deter false flaggers, here’s the kind of thing you should use:

YouTube warning

Make it clear that you’re serious.

If you’re wondering where the Fair Use is, it’s because we’re not done fighting for it yet. Until a YouTuber that’s brave enough steps forward to defend their freedom, we’re likely to keep hearing about things like #WTFU for quite some time. Not that that means that anyone’s doing anything about it.

#Fightfor15 backfires: McDonald’s considers replacing workforce with robots

robot

I remember my first job. It was working for McDonald’s, I kid you not.

However, it’s looking like times are changing. We might be saying “good-bye” to the day when high school seniors flipped burgers so they can buy Pokemon cards. The recent push for a massive jump in minimum wage has caused McDonald’s to seriously consider employing robots to replace their crew members. And considering the logistics behind it, it might actually be a pretty good move for McDonald’s.

I don’t know how expensive some of the robots they’re considering may be, but here’s some numbers to crunch:

Minimum wage may increase to $15 per hour.
A full-time work week is 40 hours.
There are about 52 weeks in a year.
Therefore, a full-time worker at the proposed minimum wage would make $31,200.00 per year.

If just one robot set McDonald’s back $60,000, it would end up paying for itself in less than two years. That would be a serious bargain. But there’s more. Employing robots can result in the following benefits:

  • Robots won’t complain about working overtime, nor would they demand more pay for it.
  • The only benefits that they’d require is routine maintenance.
  • They won’t goof off to go on Twitter to complain about their job or accuse their boss of being in some “old boy’s club”.
  • They won’t complain about special orders.
  • No showing up late. Showing up late is for humans.
  • They’re not going to have a bad day or decide to hate their jobs, so they’re always going to be polite to the customers.

And there’s more. If they can find some robots cheap enough that can accomplish the same tasks as humans, something which is becoming easier to do, McDonald’s stands to benefit from employing robots.

I know that some McDonald’s crew might mind losing their jobs to some robots. Me, I have my own reasons for thinking that a minimum wage increase is a terrible idea. I’ve worked minimum wage and close to it long enough to understand the kind of damage that minimum wage increases do to the value of money. The government might force employers to pay their staff a higher wage. But nothing is preventing renters, retailers, and utility providers from charging more for their products and services. When there is a minimum wage increase, the cost of stuff starts shooting up.

And why wouldn’t it? Businesses have a harder time making ends meet when they’re forced to pay their staff more, and increasing the costs of products and services is a natural way of trying to offset an increase in the cost of running a business. People would have more money anyway, so if they were able to pay for it before, they’d be able to pay for it at the adjusted rate.

So, in summary, we’d be payed more, but…

  • …We’d be charged more for everything, too.
  • …The value of the money itself would plummet, which would be tough nuggets if you’ve been trying to save the stuff.
  • …There’s no guarantee that there’d be a rate increase for skilled workers, so if you went to school to do what you do, it might become harder for you to get by.
  • …And you might end up losing your source of income to a robot, in which case, you’d actually end up making less.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve lived as a poor person for quite some time, so I know how these things go. The idea that poor people would benefit from a minimum wage increase is a myth. However, it’s getting to the point that even fast food workers are having to compete with robots. That humans have been less expensive to hire has long been a selling point, but it looks like that’s changing.