Waching daily Aug 25 2017

This Dad Is Super Handsome He Could Be Mistaken For A K-Pop Idol

This Korean father is so good looking that he looks like he belongs in an idol group.

Choi Minsoo posts pictures of his life with his family on Instagram, and because of his handsome looks, fans say he should be an idol!.

His cute posts and charming visuals have gained Min Soo over 117 thousand followers!.

Actually, both he and his wife are models, which explains the dashing looks!. As well as this, he has also appeared in an MV for the Korean band Sugar Bowl.

But while his appearance is that of an idol, his posts often show him as just a regular dad.

Min Soo usually posts about his family life, and his daughter and wife regularly appear in photos with him. So, while followers might not be seeing him on a stage anytime soon, they do have more of this cuteness to look forward to.

For more infomation >> This Dad Is Super Handsome He Could Be Mistaken For A K-Pop Idol - Duration: 1:28.

-------------------------------------------

Youtube adpocalypse part x - Your video monetize is now restricted! - Duration: 4:37.

Hello there internet and YouTube, this is Kenraali from General Taggart playroom

As quite small YouTuber I only use ad's, because then I can use music from Epidemic sound and Position music

Via YouTube channel partner program with Freedom.tm

My YouTube ad revenue per year is so small, that I don't much care if my videos are ad friendly or not

As small channel like me, subscriptions and views is measurement for success

YouTube has changed it's Ad system a while ago

Now they can block all or some ad's from your videos, if they are flagged as non advertisement friendly

I little understand this

As advertised in YouTube, I don't want to get associate with non wanted content

Here is tutorial for why some videos won't show advertisement at all

I understand that controversial topics in videos is what advertisers don't want to get associated

And also drugs, dangerous substances, aggressive content and so on

If you read this with very literally way, I think that most of videos are non advertisement friendly

Or would it be up to 90% of videos ?

Here you can see my latest videos

Here are some conflicted non ad friendly flags

Dying light videos are flagged as they should be

Restricted or no advertisement status

But I don't know why, there is one Dying light video which is not flagged at all

And here is also one good example

There is 2 older videos here

Natty lite bottle location guide for House party

They got same content

This one is non advertisement friendly and another one is OK

And what these videos are about?

This is monetized OK

Here is little sample from that video

This is general non sex/nudity video

In this video I will show where you can find all Natty lite bottles

This video is advertisement friendly

As you can see, it has no nudity or other offensive content

But this alternative version, is not advertisement friendly

Here is sample of that video, and there is no offensive content at all

I don't know what kind of randomize system YouTube use to detect these videos

It seems so random

As little channel, I even can't disbute it

But actually I don't currently care about it

This House party Natty lite location guide is 95% same content that allowed one has

Other one is OK, This is not

I am currently so small channel

I don't generate much views for my videos

And because that, I can't dispute these videos

Is reason for flagging Finnish language or something else?

But this is my rambling about it

What is your opinion about these new features for YouTube apocalypse number something, something.

Will bigger content creators quit on YouTube because it?

Or is YouTube monetize money loss big enough for it

And gives more room/views for smalled YouTubers like my channel?

But I think that they got most of their income in other way that YouTube ads give

I can live without any YouTube monetize, but I use it because music from Position music and Epidemic sounds

My name is Kenraali or General Taggart

"Rambling" video

Let's play when we meet, until the next time

For more infomation >> Youtube adpocalypse part x - Your video monetize is now restricted! - Duration: 4:37.

-------------------------------------------

Absurd amount of Brits think eating out of dog bowls is 'acceptable' - Duration: 4:26.

Absurd amount of Brits think eating out of dog bowls is 'acceptable'

Scallops in umbrellas and eggs on old clipboards, salads in barrels and quiche served on long swords, entire portions of crisps put in miniature bins, these arent a few of our favourite things.

Welcome to dining in 2017. Chefs and restaurateurs think it reasonable to deliver fish and chips to customers by way of a Wellington boot.

Thats not to say people dont get emotional. When a Cardiff cafe started doing jam jar cooked breakfasts, insults were thrown. We chatted to the owner at the opening. He was quite convincing.

Yet only 18 per cent of the British public think jam jars acceptable, according to new YouGov statistics. Thats just one per cent higher than garden shovels – a worryingly common reciprocal for food these days.

YouGov recently showed 2,030 Brits a series of unconventional, though real, eating vessels.

The results would likely make MasterChef judge William Sitwell, who in 2014 described square plates as an abomination – only circular will do – throw his risotto at the dessert trolley.

The research was partly inspired by Twitter feed We Want Plates , which angrily documents many of the bizarre methods of serving food to diners.

YouGov presented the figures positively – saying that fewer than one in ten Brits (9%) say it is acceptable to serve food in a shoe. And adding: A dog bowl is the second-most inappropriate plate replacement.

The overwhelming majority of Brits take exception to eating from the same type of dish as Fido and Rex, with just one in ten (10%) saying it was an acceptable thing to eat food from..

That means one in ten of us think it entirely reasonable to eat their fashionable fried chicken out of dog bowls? That seems high.

Whats more, nearly 20 per cent think it totally normal to eat out of shovels, while 28 per cent are alright with flooring panels.

So, were a party of ten to go out for dinner at the new new, posh-looking place round the corner from Jill and Simons, around three of the group would be happy to receive their steak frites on a piece of B&Qs walnut effect laminate flooring.

More than half are happy for their food to be served in a plant pot (52 per cent).

On a more positive note, 99 per cent of us are happy with circular plates. Presumably the one per cent consume a diet exclusively made up of kale smoothies. 98 per cent are happy with square plates (sorry, Sitwell).

YouGov also suggests a class divide. The majority of Brits back wooden boards and slates (69 and 64 per cent respectively).

However, as YouGov explains: Both are staples of restaurants and gastropubs attempting to effect a classier atmosphere, and, perhaps as a result, are the only two vessels on which there is a noticeable difference between working and middle class opinion.

Those in the ABC1 social grades (middle class) are 12 percentage points more likely to consider slates acceptable than those in the C2DE social grades (working class), and 8 points more likely when it comes to wooden boards.

The middle classes ruin most things, to be fair. According to the results, younger generations are more open to the more peculiar, untoward mechanisms.

For more infomation >> Absurd amount of Brits think eating out of dog bowls is 'acceptable' - Duration: 4:26.

-------------------------------------------

How Strong Is A Hurricane: An Overview Of The Saffir-Simpson Scale - Duration: 0:55.

For more infomation >> How Strong Is A Hurricane: An Overview Of The Saffir-Simpson Scale - Duration: 0:55.

-------------------------------------------

Game of Thrones fan theory: Is Bran Stark the Night King? - Duration: 6:10.

Game of Thrones fan theory: Is Bran Stark the Night King?

IS BRAN Stark secretly the Night King?. This is the wild theory that has been tearing through the internet this week ahead of Game of Thrones's big Season Seven finale and it is starting to convert a heck of a lot of fans.

While the theory may not make a lot of sense on first glance — how could the paralysed teen boy be the walking, stalking, ice spear-hurling embodiment of all that is horrifying and unholy? — it's managed to convince a lot of people.

You see, once you examine the ever-expanding body of evidence, it makes a ton of sense. Okay, maybe not so much. LISTEN TO OUR GAME OF THRONES PODCAST.

Nevertheless, the "Bran Stark/Night King" theory is super fun, tremendously compelling, and falls within the realm of (fantastic) possibilities.

So what precisely is the theory? Where did it come from? Why is it so compelling? How has the show built it up? Why is it so maddening? How has the show not built it up at all? Why is it totally going to happen? And why is it total, utter lunacy? Let's break it down.

Here's everything you need to know about the "Bran Stark/Night King" theory taking the internet by storm!.

Bran Stark from Game of Thrones. Okay, okay! Nerdist has a great breakdown of the theory (believed to have been started by a Reddit user named turm0il26).

The gist of the theory is this: In an attempt to defeat the Night King, Bran has been using his ability as Three-Eyed Raven to travel back to specific moments in Westerosi history, only his efforts have all been in vain.

Everything he's attempted to do to change history has ensured it. • Visiting the Mad King, Aerys Targaryen, to instruct him to "burn" the wights to save the living.

The Mad King supposedly heard voices and he would repeatedly say "Burn them all!" He developed an obsession with fire and placed caches of wildfire all over Kings Landing.

When the city fell, he gave the order to "Burn them all!" which Jaime took as a threat, so Jaime killed him.

This saved the city, but set up the chaos that would make up the bulk of the drama that is Game of Thrones. • The other part of the theory is that Bran warged into other Brandon Starks in history.

Specifically, he warged into the body of the mythical "Bran the Builder," who is responsible for designing many of Westeros's most breathtaking works of architecture, including the Wall.

It was thus designed to keep the White Walkers out — but it will fail.

• Finally — and this is the crux of the theory — he wargs back into the body of the First Man that the Children of the Forest turn into a White Walker.

He gets trapped in this form, and twisted from the experience, becomes the Night King.

Additional parts of the theory include the idea that the reason why the Night King "spared" Jon at Hardhome was because part of Bran recognised his brother and that Bran's outfit of choice in his "visions" resembles the outline of the Night King's.

There's also a pesky photoshop floating around meant to make people believe the connection is true.

WHY DOES THIS THEORY TOTALLY MAKE SENSE?.

First of all, ever since we found out that Bran can sort of use his "time travel" powers to be heard by people in the past, I have liked the idea that maybe — just maybe — he was responsible for the Mad King's obsession with fire.

I've also liked the theory that links Bran to Bran the Builder, a mysterious, but important, figure in Game of Thrones lore. After all, they're both magically-powered Brandon Starks. So, I'm with this theory so far.

Bran is also repeatedly warned against lingering too long in his visions of the past. The idea is that he will get stuck there forever.

Now that he's pushed away his one real friend, Meera, he's flying solo through his Three-Eyed Raven sessions. Bran is nothing if not prone to ignoring boundaries.

Finally, Bran does seem to have some sort of vague connection with the Night King. When he goes back and watches the Children of the Forest transform this poor guy into a zombie king, he winces along with him.

Likewise, when he decides to fly solo for the first time in his visions, the Night King seems attuned to Bran's presence in a way no other being has been so far.

Not to mention, director Alan Taylor did hint that fans should brace themselves because the biggest plot point of the entire series would be revealed this week.

This theory would also place all the drama of the series on the tracks of a convenient closed-loop of magical … uh … timey-wimey stuff. It would fit the bill.

Is that you, Bran? Picture: HBOSource:Supplied. WHY IS THIS THEORY COMPLETE LUNACY?.

We still haven't worked out the complete mechanics of Bran's abilities, but it seems like his ability to travel to different historical events and his power to warg into animals and people are separate skills.

In fact, the one time he used both in tandem results in the tragedy that is "Hodor." While he could whisper "Burn them all" to the Night King and maybe communicate with a past (also mystically-powered) Brandon Stark, there's so far no evidence he can warg into the bodies of people living in the past.

Hence, it's unlikely he is trapped in the body of the Night King.

Another reason he's probably not the Night King? Well, if he were, why did the former Three-Eyed Raven work so hard along with the Children of the Forest to protect him? If their goal was to end the White Walkers — and if the former Three-Eyed Raven had insight into what happened to Bran — then why not just kill him? Why train him up? Why sacrifice yourself to create that which you are fighting to destroy? Perhaps they did not know, but also, how would they not? If anyone possessed any insight about this, it would be the former Three-Eyed Raven and the Children of the Forest.

Do Bran and the Night King have a connection? Absolutely. But throughout Game of Thrones we have adversaries connected to one another in profound, often mirror-like, ways.

There's the Clegane brothers, the Lannister siblings, the frozen White Walkers and the fire-worshipping followers of R'hllor (and now the ice dragon Viserion versus his still fire-breathing brethren). The connections are there to show that they are perhaps opposites.

Finally, this is a practical concern, but there are only seven episodes left of Game of Thrones in total.

This season has thrown a lot of action our way, but the new rules and revelations dropped on us recently seem to exist to contract the plot and not to further complicate it.

To explain the logic behind this big of a twist would take an immense amount of storytelling space — and that's space the showrunners probably don't have at this point.

Consider how much time the show has set up revealing that Jon Snow is Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark's son. Have they really set up enough foreshadowing to land the reveal that Bran is the Night King?.

Maybe, possibly, but I'm betting not.