This is pure speculation but what if an employee seeing all these hard drives lying around formatted them and sold them because everything is so expensive now?

I think "screener" means specifically a copy that clearly displays that it is not the release version. For example text appearing the entire movie that say "This is a screener and property of [company]". Other aspects like the movie becomes black in white randomly. Time markings appear randomly in the frame.

I think everyone here is pointing out you could read the summary past the first sentence. I would agree with you that the word "stolen" should not be in the first sentence but the rest of the summary details the situation. Netflix was given a hard drive with a movie. Netflix lost it or it is believed to have been stolen along other hard drives.

Obviously. "Guy’s got range."—Detective Peralta

Wait till he finds out about Captain Corelli's Mandolin

Remember kids, the reason we never got a Forrest Gump 2 is because the first one lost money according to Paramount. So they didn’t pay royalties to the author. The author sued and settled with Paramount for an undisclosed amount. Technically he never got royalties for Forrest Gump; Paramount paid him the money for rights to the unwritten sequel. The author then wrote Forrest Gump 2 with Forrest as the most unlikable character and put Forrest in bizarre and outlandish plot contrivances.

You asked why passengers like me would choose to fly nonstop as opposed to fly with stops. And there are many reasons why I would choose that. But according to you, I am wrong for having my own opinion.

Of course it is. You outlined all the preferences you have including using Singapore Airlines. Therefore Qantas Airlines should never create a flight you would not take. Everyone should have less choice because of your preferences.

So I should believe you over Qantas that is doing feasibility analysis. But again, Qantas should not try because you said so.

What are you talking about? That happens now. To leave Australia to London requires stops in places you may not want to stop. Also you do know that multiple airlines exist, right? If Qantas creates this flight, you can still fly your Singapore Airlines with a stop in Singapore. There are multiple airlines you will be able to choose if you want to stop. You are treating Qantas giving other people a nonstop option as them taking away your option that you would never choose. Your entire argument is everyone should make your choice.

My understanding is that Australia has a duty time 11.5 hours for pilots. How does that count towards a 20 hour flight? What about the flight attendants. But that would be for a normal flight

You do understand that someone "stating" something does not make it true. By that logic, I am stating now you murdered Abraham Lincoln.

Please cite ANYWHERE that 2nm tech is being made by non EUV machines. I'll wait. All you have is someone saying it is true.

So you agree you are being an idiot?

I think everyone lies about what they can produce when it comes to chips. Intel lies. AMD lies. Apple lies. And those are companies that have to eventually produce products where people can test their lies. If you think China never lies about things they keep in secret, then I have a bridge to sell you.

This was a test flight. People seem to forget that in the summary: Test flight. They have not worked out how many crews will be on such a long flight. This flight had no passengers and only Qantas and Airbus employees on board to test the plane.

Did you miss the part where Tolouse is an Airbus manufacturing hub and this was a test flight? They could have flown the plane anywhere but if they need the plane back in Tolouse for final assembly and to remove all the testing equipment, they should probably land the plane in Tolouse.

This was a test flight. No one said Melbourne to Tolouse was going to be a final route for the airline.

You answered your own question. People pay a premium for non-stop flights all the time. For passengers, there is less chance of missing connecting flights due to delays, weather, etc. Less chance of luggage not arriving at the destination. There are many reasons to use a non-stop flight.

Also from the standpoint of Qantas, they currently have to land in other airports like Singapore which imposes a fee for each landing. They have to pay whatever fees for food, fuel, that the airport charges.

No one is taking away your option to have stops if you want. This is for people who want a non-stop option.

So your argument against choice is you don't like that choice yourself. Therefore no one should have that choice because they are "daft".

Because it was a "test flight" as mentioned in the summary, it carried no passengers. It had recording equipment in seats to simulate passengers. I am sure there were other tests happening as well. Due to the long nature of the flight, these planes will have to be configured to run slightly different than other flights. For example, they would have to serve more meals per passenger which means more galley storage built in.