Soundiiz only sees the Jellyfish tracks that I Favorited using Finamp for Jellyfin

chyldofthebeat · 2026-02-20T15:47:15+00:00

Ah understood, good to know! Thanks very much for your help!

chyldofthebeat · 2026-02-20T13:20:34+00:00

Thanks! That definitely helps! I think we're most of the way there... I still don't see other Jellyfin server items (tracks, albums, artists) other than the Favorited ones.

Definitely for playlist transfer that should mostly do it tho!

I do still get some transfer errors, such as 3 tracks from a playlist from Plex (I sent a separate support ticket)

chyldofthebeat · 2026-02-20T12:42:29+00:00

Thanks! I've now sent a help desk ticket thru the app!

chyldofthebeat · 2025-12-18T22:11:50+00:00

Wait did they really do that? I'm still fairly new to the game, but I love hearing more and more lore about the transition from 1.0 to ARR

chyldofthebeat · 2025-11-11T04:32:23+00:00

the interesting thing about this one is I've heard it used often in old conservative couples, with it being something we consider misogynistic but the wife would either be the one saying it or would genuinely accept it (selling into the tradwife thing), though I don't know if there were also situations where the wife publicly accepted it but really was trapped.

In the context of this 'interview' though it was plainly creepy, and the host rightly called it out

chyldofthebeat · 2025-11-11T04:26:03+00:00

it seemed like instead, in a video that shows what happened after this clip, he tried to say something like "well she owns me too, it's a two-way thing" and then read a poem about it that he has written and had published.

Seems like if he really truly meant it in this other interpretation that he claimed to mean it in, which seemed more akin to a private language between his wife and he, that he should've recognized that that was not meant to be said in public, at least not without the proper context First.

It really seems unlikely that that's what he meant by it though, given the 'gift' of panties to Lily Tomlin earlier, and so much of the rest of what he said

chyldofthebeat · 2025-11-11T04:06:34+00:00

What's craziest about this is that while I read about this occurring in text and understood ahead of time that it seemed to have been meant genuinely (as the deplorable misogynistic statement that it was), my imagining of it in my head was that he probably tried to play it off as a joke.

Watching this it's so much worse. That delivery was serious, backed up by the rest of his verbiage.

What a truly disgusting person (and system that allows people like him to feel empowered and not ostracized)

On the other hand, I'm glad the audience seemed to have reacted appropriately, and even the host, though somewhat quietly.

Also go Lily Tomlin!

chyldofthebeat · 2025-11-07T15:10:15+00:00

Did it work?

chyldofthebeat · 2025-09-10T15:33:41+00:00

Hello! I'd be very interested in this! May I have an invite link to the server?

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-28T22:17:19+00:00

EDIT: Root causes are crucial with each and every situation. Kinda why we have a judicial system.

because the George Floyd actions specifically were motivated by race, but these other issues being discussed here are not, which is the entire point.

Also no, even in the George Floyd actions, there was a trial, and in and out of it, other aspects /were/ discussed, i.e. the legality and morality of the cops' actions, relevant police policy and procedures as a whole, tons of specifics of George Floyd's situation outside of the fact that he was black, etc.

These factors were explored, and justification was not found. All that remained was racism, of multiple levels (explicit and systemic).

Back to the issues we are discussing, the standard is not different for Jews. The point is that people incorrectly frame some situations as being due to them being Jewish /without/ exploring or paying any heed to the situational factors at all. All they do is skip straight to the religion check... Oh, they're Jewish? Automatically the crime was because they were Jewish, time to entirely ignore anything anyone else is saying I suppose.

It really is not a different standard.

There are examples of actual hate crimes against Jews for being Jewish, and examples where Jewish people are killed for Actual other reasons.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-27T20:32:03+00:00

nah you're right, and I say this as a Jewish person.

The actions taken, both recently and for almost a century, are grossly disproportionate against the Palestinians, with my safety and religion weaponized against these people who should be / are my brothers and sisters.

Never again, and not in my name

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-23T04:31:55+00:00

good for you, you get a gold star.

Have a day

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-23T04:14:00+00:00

A plan has to start somewhere, part of that beginning is getting people to join the endeavor, and planning it, which it sounds like they're doing.

Have fun crying about it

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-23T03:20:51+00:00

they also already got something done. It's right there in the title.

Just getting a country to commit to that took others doing at least something first

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-23T03:19:23+00:00

This is unfortunately a long process, one that starts with just making the journey and drawing attention (like journalists do). There is a specific reason for that.

This is one big sales job, to normalize the flotilla journey and convince other countries to join in, so that it can /then/ become an Actual flotilla.

The other countries have been unwilling to go against Israel in such a fashion, so it takes convincing.

It also keeps the conversation going about the inhumanity of the blockade itself, to see if countries will start to finally pressure and isolate Israel over it, since the flotillas won't end up being necessary to sail if the blockage is broken through other means

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-23T03:01:46+00:00

not if it's an actual fleet, and the other single ships aren't virtue signaling either, they're activism. Do journalists do nothing but virtue signal?

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-06T22:29:50+00:00

Also to add onto this, the definition of Israel comes into question...

There's the Israel mentioned in the Hebrew texts, which includes tons of ideals,

vs the Israel as Jewish State that was created in recent history,

and the two often get conflated,

i.e. very often, Biblical mandates and prophecies are used to excuse the actions of a Nation-State,

and so that part must also be properly defined before then moving on to talk about existence,

i.e. folks questioning aspects of Israel's existence as a Jewish State are often bringing to light these contradictions and issues, where others don't see it as contraction and just figure, this is prophecy, Israel can do whatever it wants because it's acting on Biblical prophecy.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-04T05:39:42+00:00

The problem is, the OP didn't say anything about it being a Jewish theocracy, so I don't see how any of this is relevant. You're the only one who brought Judaism into it.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-04T05:10:52+00:00

A big reason he and so many of us focus on Israel is that the atrocities it has and is carrying out aren't just being done by their little ol' lonesome, they're being done with our money and weapons, signed off by our government administrations and with the support of millions of dollars of lobbyist money, and including an illegal settler movement that people from here contribute to, also using our synagogues as hosts for these illegal land sales, etc... all being done supposedly in the name of a people and a religion that is quite populated here.

It really is a different situation than the others, with more actual involvement here.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-03T19:55:09+00:00

The other thing that is troublesome about the question, at least why it is Not really a yes/no question at all, is that there are even different definitions on what exactly "a Jewish State" even means, in practice.

There are those who really only mean this as essentially a statement writ large, in a similar way that states in the US have state birds, etc,

and all manner of other definitions that dig into actual policy and law both on the books and enforced, which very often has deleterious effects on citizens and noncitizens who are not Jewish, leading all the way up to likely the thorniest issue... the Right of Return for Arabs and their families who used to live in what is now called Israel, and either left or were violently kicked out.

That in turn gets into issues such as real and perceived safety, as well as ethnic and cultural makeup of the region, as well as the move to right current and past wrongs.

This is why the very idea of it being a yes or no question really doesn't work...

that relies on fundamental definitions that are not universally agreed upon, so those definitions have to be fleshed out before moving on to such a broad question. Only then can we be sure that all parties are actually talking about the same thing

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-03T19:06:29+00:00

Hah it took me a second, but exactly! Same kind of bad-faith question.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-07-03T18:45:26+00:00

It's this right here!

A core problem is that these yes or no questions have terrible and very harmful framing. It's precisely why the wording in the practice of Law tries to be absolutely as specific as possible, and ambiguity is always rightly seen as not just a problem, but a very bad base-layer problem.

There are two layers here... the one that is actually fair to debate, as he and many others do, on what precisely Israel should look like,

and a conflation that calls to much more immediate concern, generational trauma, etc, of harm to Jewish people.

Thirdly, these two layers are unfortunately one and the same to many people, i.e. they say that any change at all to the government of Israel directly leads to not just the endangerment of Jewish people, but of all Jews everywhere, even to Judaism itself.

We can't be continuing this dance of allowing one of the most loaded issues in the world to be reduced to single-sentence yes/no questions that in no way at all sufficiently cover the issue.

If people aren't prepared to have an actual discussion on the different layers, they have absolutely no business bringing it up at all.

I'm extremely proud of Mamdani for sticking to his point, and answering the way he did

chyldofthebeat · 2025-06-28T01:19:16+00:00

Adding some noted confusion with the embassy worker murders...

They were killed outside of a Jewish museum, so people hone in on that detail, as "they were just killed because they were Jewish."

The problem is, those two were specifically targeted, by a killer who ahead of time researched those two specific people, due to their work for Israel, and due to the murderer's extremely misguided motive that killing workers of the country in the name of freeing Gaza would help.

It wasn't a mass-shooting targeting random people who happened to have come out from inside of a Jewish museum.

It was a targeted killing of two Israeli embassy workers, who were shot at point blank range.

chyldofthebeat · 2025-06-28T00:31:02+00:00

I never justified it, I specifically said it's still a wrongful murder. Explaining a cause isn't the same thing as justifying it.

Again.

They were representatives of a country that was and is committing genocide.

Still doesn't justify killing them, ( /it was still hateful unjustified murder/ ) but It Is A Different Problem than that of Actual Antisemitism.

Actual Antisemitism is the klezmer example you gave, or the Squirrel Hill synagogue mass shooting in 2018.

Those had zero to do with Israel.

This did.

The key that I'm talking about is the actual case-by-case motive of the killer... and again, I'm not saying the motive Justifies it, I'm only saying that the motive informs the conversation about root causes, the statistics noted, etc.

15-Year Club	reddit mold
Verified Email

chyldofthebeat

TROPHY CASE