I don't think I ever heard of an end-user paying for it, even once...

*That* depends on the movie. Some movies NEED to be long, others need to be cut. But making each movie the same length is a really bad idea. (E.g. I saw a version of War and Peace that was so long it ran in two days. It didn't need to be cut, but the break was necessary.)

Yes. 57 years ago. Apollo 8 was the first manned trip to the moon, and it did a lot better than a flyby.
SLS is nothing but a giant money-funnel, sending US taxpayer dollars by the billion to Boeing and Northrop Grumman,
using leftover parts from the Shuttle program, designed in the 1970s. Yet it has still taken 15 years to reach the first manned test flight.
Orion is even older, a scaled up Apollo capsule. Supposedly partially re-usable, but that is looking very unlikely.

The real excitement is the competition between Blue Origin and SpaceX for the lunar lander.

"itsh shimple, that's whuy I didn'ta understaand ert!"

Not very convincing.

That's true, but this study isn't "out of left field" at all, it's an expected result and there have been lots of studies suggesting problems with HFCS. There's also a lot of industrial propaganda that floods the space with repeated studies designed to "fail" to find a difference.

Bananas are a poor choice for an example of a "natural" food. It invites argument.

Olde English "800", of course

Clearer, but wrong.

I was just about to ask where I can get my mussel symbiote!

The Inuit have a short lifespan. They culturally disagree that heart failure resulting in death in your 50s is a disease; they consider that dying from old age. And communities will reject doctors that diagnose heart disease, other than in cases like malformed valves. Anything diet and lifestyle related they reject as a disease.

Resulting in low-information people who like to repeat what they heard thinking they're immune to heart disease, because they have a lot diagnosed rate.

Any time a population is claimed to be immune to lifestyle effects, or have results counter to other populations, check their lifespans; if they're not living longer as a result, it's always going to be an issue with diagnosis.

He played Jim Morrison in The Doors, for one, and actually sang the part himself. I'm sure you'll respond by panning that performance in defense of your question, but for probably 99% of people alive today, that performance is what is in their heads when they think of Jim Morrison, and they're not wrong.

He did his part to make Heat what it is, on a stage full of the biggest names Hollywood had at the time.

So, yeah. Pretty good, as they go.

That's beautiful. You should contact SAG-AFTRA and enlighten them as to your talent.

But you didn't actually answer the question. You expounded on the what actors do, but not why they should be protected. You offered no evidence that a generated character couldn't also do these things, and if so, why or how they might be prevented from doing so. Can you explain why an AI actor couldn't also adapt to different roles? I'm not aware of such a limitation.

The irony is pretty great here. Every member of the Kilmer estate would certainly have opposed such things while he lived, and we've seen that sentiment from living actors and their mouthpiece legion recently. Seeing a bankable actor getting AI'ed into a role for the first time will definitely have them howling from their coastal mansion roofs. But he's gone now, and can't earn those Hollywood big bucks as a living actor. Suddenly, the Kilmer estate is ready to sign off on AI Kilmer taking roles in movies! Weird huh?

Why? Is there some shortage of neckbeard commie forum warriors now?

That's entirely deliberate. The movie involves North American native characters, so we already know it's another hollywood scab picking exercise. If any meaningful plot were exposed in the trailer, that suspicion would only be confirmed.

Kind of a waste of an AI ghost. If you're going to authorize Val Kilmer for something, make it be the Heat sequel.

Secretary of War is a more accurate description. I agree that legally it's Secretary of Defense, but that has always been a misnomer.