#mentioned: nate shapiro

[whocaresifwearecrazy]

#MechaMemories

"Hey Roxie, remember that one time after a really wild curse?"

"Define 'one time' and 'wild curse'."

"Well, after we all dealt with the curse, you asked if anyone wanted to go stargazing with you-"

"-and you were the only one who agreed to go."

"I loved just stargazing while you infodumped on astronomy and astrology and constellations!"

"At least someone appreciated it..."

"Look, I HAD to fix my hair, Roxie!"

"Stop while you're ahead, Nate."

"Fine..."

[wrongydkjquotes]

.////.

"I looked for the truth. Found it. Didn't like it. Wish to hell I could forget it."

- buzz, looking at nate's computer to see if he really did OnlyFans on the side

(Source: Alex Mercer, [PROTOTYPE])

[beepsparks]

My brain just remembered something

In a "YDKJ: The Ride" playlist on YouTube, Guy was supposed to host the literature floor before Buzz escaped the trapdoor and pushed him in it. And then Schmitty pushed Buzz in the trapdoor

And I like to think that Buzz KNEW what floor they were on and was like "NOPE! I better take over ON THIS FLOOR because you have NEVER read a book in your life"

10:52 am, 4/3/2024

Oh my god how has this never occurred to me. Oh my GOD this is probably what happened and the thought process. How did I not think of this especially considering Schmitty says “look Buzz, i’m up next” i am without a brain ig

Y’know what I applaud Buzz. Guy hosting the literature episode would’ve been a complete disaster. But it did also indirectly result in Schmitty saying to me “aww did all those words scare you?” Mockingly which was pretty mean considering it was just me getting one question wrong so oof

Although this reminds me of another thing… okay I could be wrong here but Schmitty says “I can share” to Buzz when Buzz is all pissed before sending him to “The Bottom” for the SECOND time so not only is he a liar but I get the slight vibe Schmitty was getting a little greedy with episode time and was only stopped because Nate caught him off guard and sent HIM to The Bottom

I’m probably wrong with that but its kinda a fun thought, Schmitty getting greedy with screentime despite saying he can share, so he’s a little hypocrite

[magicalincorrectrobodokiquotes]

Nate: "Where's Guy, Buzz, and Cookie?" Schmitty, cursed/jinxed: "They're playing hide and seek." Nate: "Where?" Schmitty: "I don't think you get how this game works."

[askadelshapiroandmastermentalist]

Cover art for a upcoming project? Heck yeah!

YDKJ THE RIDE - RE DUB ft these lovely people mentioned in the artwork!

And of course I am taking the role as Nate Shapiro!

[minifridge44]

literally just an excuse to share my ydkj headcanons 🔇🔇🔇

nate

has one of those motorcycles with the really high handlebars

thinks he’s really cool (he’s mildly cool)

physically can’t smoke/vape/be around fire without getting an asthma attack (he doesn’t even have asthma)

cookie does have asthma and smokes just fine

thinks he’s jd from heathers (he’s martha)

i think i already mentioned this but him and cookie are brothers 

his stage name is nate shapiro because he didn’t think the name nate masterson sounded good 

because he’s stupid 😒😒

aerosmith fan

used to work at an apple bees

dating a guy named ricky 🐦‍⬛

buzz

second youngest host, guy is the youngest

wayyyy taller than you would expect (like 5’10)

nintendo fan

nerd 🤓🤓🤓

imagine dragons fan

definitely plays dnd

from new york but moved to la young to live with family

one of THOSE princess bride fans

drives a little blue pickup truck 

terrified of the dark 

reads a lot

i don’t headcanons any of the ydkj hosts to be trans or non-binary, but if i did it would be buzz

guy

youngest out of the ydkj hosts (30s)

knows next to nothing about sports, only hosted ydkj sports because it was a good gig

the people at ydkj also only hired him because he was buff and looked like he would know a lot about sports

loves card games (poker, spades, solitaire, etc.) and is really really good at them

looooooooves pb&j

favorite restaurant is chipotle 

likes to knit and knits cookie’s cats sweaters and hats 

studied psychology in college

if you get my references i heart you for real

also i’m still taking drawing requests in my ask box!!

[magicalrobodokiofficial]

New Custom Trigger Warnings for Magical Robodoki!

Added them to better convey the issues of a few select chapters in a cheeky, yet straightfoward way!

In order of appearance:

The Power of Love

"Hey...I don't wanna spoil the surprise...but in today's episode, someone WILL undergo a "Disney Death", as TV Tropes calls it. Don't worry, they get better, and there's no gore, but not until a lot of angst and crying occurs.

To put in as spoiler free as possible, the way said angsty-grieving paragraph is written may upset some people with anxiety or those with a nervous disposition, and the author of this fic felt it was necessary to give this heads up as someone who was diagnosed with anxiety herself. So...uh...yeah! If you're triggered by that sorta thing and don't feel like you're in the headspace to read this, feel free to come back later!

P.S: If you're reading this, hi Bob!"

- Aianna Flowers

****

Hearts Fall, Flames Rise Part 2

"Hey, Buzz Lippman here. Just wanted to let you know that there's a realistic depiction of anxiety in this chapter, which includes an anxiety attack and is filled with...explicit thoughts that people that suffer with anxiety have, and though they don't get any worse than 'everyone hates me, I'm a failure', it could be potentially upsetting to read regardless."

"Hi, Bob's here too! Anyway, the previously stated triggers are a huge focus of the episode. Stuff does get better near the end with the help of her friends-"

"Friend."

"-friend, but if you're not in the right headspace to read this, now you know."

"Yeah! Anyway, I'm gonna get a coffee. Wanna tag along?"

"Sure! For those of you staying, enjoy the episode!"

- Buzz Lippman and Bob Sharp

****

They Blinded Me With Science

"Before we begin today's episode, I'd like to warn you that there is a flashback scene that contains gaslighting/emotional abuse and a realistic depiction of an anxiety attack near the end of today's episode. Also, the entire episode's theme is dealing with the consequences of my dick of a mom...being a dick of a mom. The story is the same light-hearted fare as usual (apart from that flashback scene), but if you'd wish to skip this episode for whatever reason, we won't judge. Hell, I wish I was that lucky."

- Roxanne Flowers

****

Quite a Ricky Situation

"Not to be a fucking prude or anything, but this chapter is slightly more adult in that the theme is about two-timing and flings. As in, the 'short, spontaneous sexual relationship' definition. To put it bluntly, there's gonna be a lot of suggestive mentions about my dating behavior that some people might not approve of, and that's perfectly ok, hon! Just don't read it if that sorta thing triggers ya.

Oh, and there's a major character death too, briefly mentioned, and it happens offscreen. Legal would kick my ass if I forgot that."

- Nate Shapiro

[hellyeahydkj]

Electronic Media  1996-05-20: Vol 15 Iss 21 and in a old stream, harry gottlieb talks about the pilot for the original ydkj tv show (not 2001)

[pigspeetsandhooflikefeets]

you gotta tell us everyone else's labels

ok here's the four host's titles according to the unnamed announcer

Cookie: "The Host As Delicious As His Name"

Guy: "The Hardest Working Guy In Trivia"

Schmitty: "The Most Dangerous Man In Trivia"

Nate: "The Original Guru of Trivia"

the announcer only refers to Buzz one time (either Language or Circus), and he only calls him "your host, Buzz". like Cookie, he's never referred to by last name via the announcer. I find this fact for both of them... weird

[mozart-tt]

Here's something to think about : Buzz also tells Nate in Volume 2 that he heard that they fired him. Which Nate tries to shut down with what could be called an excuse. I feel like JellyVision may have actually fired Nate now.

if i remember correctly i believe one of those excuses was " creative differences " but considering he appears again in the ride, referenced somewhere in 2015, that being " has anyone seen nate shapiro? he hasn't been in the studio for like 15 years " in the lobby, and is in full stream , pretty sure his va hasn't been fired , heck isn't he also like a higher up for jellyvision? there's also a more recent stream that mentioned they don't like killing off characters  (link added!)

[mindmastered-archive]

Nate almost breaks character every time someone mentions Ben Shapiro "owning (someone) with facts and logic."

[whocaresifwearecrazy]

"TURN AROUND, BRIIIIIIIIGHT EYES!!!"

@magicalrobodokiofficial

Nate regretted uploading a video of Avery and Guy during karaoke night after seeing how viral it was going

[wrongydkjquotes]

Nate had no idea what the hell was going on in this place. His memories were fake, he was working for the bad guy, and not a single line of dialogue involved a character telling the truth. But after his evil boss punched him in the balls and then kicked him in the balls, Nate was sure about one thing: he's going to shoot this god damn lady in the head.

(Source: Seanbaby, "The 12 Best Arnold Kills (Out of 509)

[un-enfant-immature]

This startup is helping food app delivery workers start their own damn delivery companies

Following many months of pressure, DoorDash, one of the most frequently used food delivery apps in the U.S., said late last month that it was finally changing its tipping policy to pass 100% of tips along to workers, rather than employ some of that money toward defraying its own costs.

The move was a step in the right direction, but as a New York Times piece recently underscored, there are many remaining challenges for food delivery couriers, including not knowing where a delivery is going until a worker picks it up (Uber Eats), having just seconds to decide whether or not to accept an order (Postmates), and not being guaranteed a minimum wage (Deliveroo), not to mention the threat of delivery robots taking their jobs.

It’s a big enough problem that a young, nine-person startup called Dumpling has decided to tackle it directly. Its big idea: turn today’s delivery workers into “solopreneurs” who build their own book of clients and keep much more of the money changing hands. It newly has $3 million in backing from two venture firms that know the gig economy well, too: Floodgate, an early investor in Lyft (firm cofounder Ann Miura-Ko is on Lyft’s board), and Fuel Capital, where TaskRabbit founder Leah Busque is now a general partner.

We talked with Dumpling’s cofounders and co-CEOs earlier this week to learn more about the company and how viable it might be. Nate D’Anna spent eight years as a director of corporate development at Cisco; Joel Shapiro spent more than 13 years with National Instruments, where he held a variety of roles, including as a marketing director focused on emerging markets. National Instruments, based in Austin, is also where Shapiro and D’Anna first met back in 2002. D’Anna now works in the Bay Area, while Shapiro runs a team from Seattle.

TC: You started working together out of college. What prompted you to come together to start Dumpling?

JS: We’d stayed good friends as we’d done different things with our careers, but we were both seeing rising inequality happening at companies and within their workforces, and we were both interested in using our [respective] background and experiences to try and make a difference.

ND: When we were first started, Dumpling wasn’t a platform for people to start their own business. It was a place for people to voice opinions — kind of like a Glassdoor for workers with hourly jobs, including in retail. What jumped out at us was how many gig workers began using the platform to talk about the horrible ways they were being treated, not having a traditional boss and not being protected by traditional policies.

TC: At what point did you think you were onto a separate opportunity?

ND: We knew that a mission-driven company that’s trying to do good by people who’ve been exploited by Silicon Valley companies has to be profitable. I was an investor at Cisco, and I was very clear that the money side has to work.  So we started talking with gig workers and we asked, ‘Why are you working for a terrible company where you’re getting injured, where you’re getting penalized for not taking the next job?’ And the response was money. It was, “I need to be able to buy these groceries and I don’t want to put them on my own credit card.” That was an epiphany for us. If the biggest paint point to running these businesses is working capital and we can solve that — if business owners will pay for access to capital and for tools that help them run their business — that clicked for us.

TC: A big part of your premise is that while gig economy companies have anonymized people as best they can, there’s a meaningful segment of services where a stranger or a robot isn’t going to work.

JS: Shoppers for gig companies often hear, ‘When you [specifically] come, it makes my day,” so our philosophy was to build a platform that supports the person. When you run a business and build a clientele that you get to know, you’re incentivized for that [client] to have a good experience. So we wondered, how do we provide tools for someone who has done personal shopping and is maybe a part of Facebook groups and mom groups and who not only needs fund to shop but also help with marketing and a website and training so they can promote their services to other people?

ND: We also realized that to be successful and to make business owners be successful that we needed to lower the transaction cost for them to find customers, so we created a marketplace where shoppers can look at reviews, understand different shoppers’ knowledge regarding when it comes to various specialties and stores, then help match them.

TC: How many shoppers are now running their own businesses on Dumpling and what do they get from you exactly?

JS: More than 500 across the country are operating in 37 states.  And we want to give then everything they need. A big part of that is capital, so we give [them] a credit card, then it’s effectively the operational support, including order management, customer relationship functionality, customer communication, a storefront, an app that they can use to run their business from their phone. . .

TC: What about insurance, tax help, that sort of stuff?

ND: A lot of VCs pushed us in that direction. The good news is a lot of companies are coming up to provide those ancillary services, and we’ll eventually partner with them if you want to export your data to Intuit or someone else. Right now, we’re really focused on [shoppers’] core business, helping then to operate it, to find customers, that’s our sweet spot for the immediate future.

TC: What are you charging? Who are you charging?

JS: A subscription model is an obvious way for us to go at some point, but right now, because we’re in the transaction flow, we’re taking a percentage of each transaction. The [solopreneuer] pays us $5 per transaction as a platform fee; the shopper pays us five percent atop the delivery fee set by the [person who is delivering their goods]. So if someone spends $100 on groceries, that customer pays us $5, and the shopper pays us $5 and the shopper gets that delivery fee, plus his or her tip.

The vast amount goes to the shopper, unlike with today’s model [wherein the vast majority goes to delivery companies]. Our average shopper is bringing home $32 in earnings per order, roughly three times as much as when they work for  other grocery delivery apps. I think that’s partly because we communicate to [shoppers] that they are supporting local businesses and local entrepreneurs and they are receiving an average tip of 17 percent on their orders. But also, when you know your shopper and that person gets to know your preferences, you’re much more comfortable ordering non-perishables, like produce picked the way you like. That leads to huge order sizes, which is another reason that average earnings are higher.

TC: You’re fronting the cost for groceries. Is that money coming from your venture funding? Do you have a debt facility?

ND: We don’t. The money moves so fast. The shoppers are using the card to shop, then getting the money back again, so the cycle time is quick. It’s two days, not six months.

TC: How does this whole thing scale? Are you collecting data that you hope will inform future products?

ND: We definitely want to use tech to empower [shoppers] instead of control them. But [our CTO and third cofounder Tom Schoellhammer] came from Google doing search there, and eventually we [expect to] recommend similar stores, or [extend into] beauty or pet other local services. Grocery delivery is one obvious place where the market is broken, but where you want a trusted person involved, and you’re in the flow when people are looking for something [the opportunity opens up]. Shoppers’ knowledge of their local operation zone can be leveraged much more.

[bharatiyamedia-blog]

U.S. appeals court docket blocks Trump administration contraception exemptions

http://tinyurl.com/yypbrt2q (Reuters) – A federal appeals court docket on Friday blocked the Trump administration from implementing new guidelines permitting employers to acquire exemptions from an Obamacare requirement they supply medical insurance that covers girls’s contraception. FILE PHOTO: An illustration image exhibits a girl holding a contraception tablet at her residence in Good January 3, 2013. REUTERS/Eric Gaillard The third U.S. Circuit Courtroom of Appeals in Philadelphia upheld a nationwide injunction that blocked the implementation of guidelines permitting employers with spiritual and ethical objections to hunt exemptions from the 2010 healthcare regulation’s requirement. The three-judge panel agreed with Democratic state attorneys basic from Pennsylvania and New Jersey pursuing the case that the foundations issued by the U.S. Departments of Well being and Human Providers, Labor and Treasury had “critical substantive issues.” The lawsuit was considered one of a number of by Democratic state attorneys basic difficult the foundations, which focused a requirement within the Inexpensive Care Act, or Obamacare, former Democratic President Barack Obama’s signature home coverage achievement. The contraceptive mandate required employer-provided medical insurance embody protection for contraception with no co-payment. Pennsylvania Lawyer Common Josh Shapiro on Twitter mentioned the ruling would defend girls’s entry to contraceptive care. Republican President Donald Trump’s administration itself has estimated as much as 126,400 girls nationally would lose contraceptive protection because of their employers benefiting from the exemptions. Kelly Laco, spokeswoman for the U.S. Justice Division, which defended the foundations in court docket, mentioned it was disenchanted. “Spiritual organizations shouldn’t be pressured to violate their mission and deeply-held beliefs,” she mentioned. The appellate ruling upheld a nationwide injunction issued in January by a federal choose in Philadelphia. One other choose in California has blocked the foundations’ enforcement in 14 states and the District of Columbia. In Friday’s choice, U.S. Circuit Decide Patty Shwartz, writing for the panel, mentioned the administration lacked good trigger to forgo a requirement to offer the general public discover and the prospect to touch upon interim variations of the foundations it adopted in 2017. The administration had cited an pressing must alleviate the hurt confronted by employers with spiritual objections. However Shwartz mentioned its “need to deal with the purported hurt to spiritual objections doesn’t ameliorate the necessity to comply with acceptable procedures.” She mentioned authorities businesses confirmed a “lack of open-mindedness” after they later adopted comparable, closing guidelines in 2018, which have been additionally not approved by Obamacare. A nationwide preliminary injunction stopping the foundations’ enforcement was essential, she mentioned, to guard the states from in opposition to the potential prices they’d face if girls’s employers refused to offer insurance coverage that lined contraception. Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; enhancing by Tom Brown Our Requirements:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. Source link

[hellyeahydkj]

about the whole rumored nate cameo in 2015(?) mystery. i'm kinda convinced he's just misremembering or something, as i've listened to most of the voice lines in 2011 and 2015 and literally the only mentions of nate i recall are the "anyone seen nate shapiro" and a question intro where old man mistakes cookie for nate. maybe he's even thinking of something in the lost facebook game. maybe it's something that didn't make it in. who even knows?

hm yeah, in all those videos where it's talked about for a bit it's like " was it in 2011, 2015 or facebook? " like so in a interview with arnie niekamp . through i'm certain this easter egg made it in one way or another because why bring it up a couple times? and if 2011 doesn't seem to mention nate then it's likely it was in the facebook version :L