Best friends Timon and Pumbaa are a couple of Disney’s most beloved characters from The Lion King, but there’s no way that these creatures would get along in real life, right? Well, that’s where you’d be wrong! Someone caught some amazing footage of a warthog and a meerkat playing together, and it’s the most adorable thing you’ve ever seen. These two really do look like the real-life versions of their cartoon counterparts! In the precious clip, the stocky warthog can be seen rolling around in the grass with his meerkat companion. Both of them seem to be having the best time. At one point, “Pumbaa” actually allows “Timon” to sit on his back. These animals really look like they trust one another! View this post on Instagram A post shared by Paul Avellino l The Garden Guinea (@avellinofarms) What makes this hilarious footage even better is that Hakuna Matata, the Disney characters’ signature song, is playing throughout. After watching the real-life Timon and Pumbaa play outside, we honestly believe they have no worries! This video has received over a million views online. Commenters were shocked to see the familiar-looking warthog and meerkat in the flesh. “Is this the live action film of The Lion King?” joked one user. Another exclaimed, “They exist!” Is it normal for warthogs and meerkats to be friends? Interestingly enough, Natural Habitat Adventures tells us that warthogs and meerkats aren’t usually the best of friends. Although they’re not necessarily sworn enemies, they’re not typically spotted together in the wild. It sounds like it’s quite an anomaly that the two animals in the video above have such a friendly relationship. Although meerkats and warthogs don’t spend much time with one another in nature, rehabilitation can apparently bring them together. Namibian farmer Ruben Lambrechts cares for many different creatures, including a few “Timons” and “Pumbaas” of his own. He shares tons of videos of his rehab patients on social media, and they seem to get along pretty well. @rubennamibia I adore my Animal Family! #farmlife #animallover #baboon #warthog #meerkat ♬ Die With A Smile – Lady Gaga & Bruno Mars Whatever circumstances brought the two animals in the first video together, we’d still like to believe they really are the real-life Timon and Pumbaa! You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Real-Life Timon & Pumbaa Caught On Camera Playing Together appeared first on InspireMore.

'Which part of that don't ya'll understand?'

Democrats Forecast Plan To Go After High-Profile Trump Supporters

We need a complete and total shutdown...

'We should not celebrate a broken institution'

'It would be like, sex days'

'Not coming out!'

The word “man” in song titles has inspired some of the most memorable tracks across different genres and eras, each using it to bring out unique angles on human experience. From Billy Joel’s heartfelt storytelling in Piano Man to David Bowie’s mysterious reflections in The Man Who Sold the World, every song on this list highlights a different take on what it means to be a “man.” There’s the enduring wisdom of Lynyrd Skynyrd’s Simple Man, the raw force of Black Sabbath’s Iron Man, and the wanderer’s spirit in the Allman Brothers Band’s Ramblin’ Man. Each song here—from Chicago’s powerhouse The post 10 Best Songs With The Word ‘Man’ In The Title appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. It seems every election cycle needs a bogeyman, and for Senator Mark Warner, that bogeyman is Russian disinformation. Fresh off Capitol Hill, Warner’s latest initiative is to investigate how major internet domain companies—yes, the middlemen who register web addresses—might play a role in spreading disinformation. The target list reads like a Who’s Who of the digital backstage: Cloudflare, GoDaddy, NameCheap, NameSilo, Newfold, and Verisign. But behind the supposedly patriotic mission to “protect democracy” lies a question worth asking: is Warner protecting discourse, or prepping a Trojan horse to squelch online dissent? We obtained a copy of Senator Warner’s letter to domain companies for you here. Warner’s strategy is unique in its ambition, not in its tactics. By moving his focus to the core of internet infrastructure—domain registrars—he’s essentially skipping over social media and diving into the plumbing of the web itself. It’s a bold move. After all, every website starts with a domain name, right? And if we control the names, we can theoretically control the whole game. Yet it’s hard not to notice that Warner’s targets aren’t purveyors of propaganda; they’re providers of services as basic to the internet as electricity is to a house. In fairness, no one denies that the Department of Justice’s findings reveal some troubling realities, if true. Fake outlets are indeed masquerading as legitimate news sources, with some impersonating heavy hitters like the Washington Post and Fox News. The Department of Justice even flagged sites mimicking official government pages in countries like France and Germany, reportedly linking these decoys back to the Russian government. But what Warner and his allies are suggesting is that if disinformation exists, the buck should stop at the domain registrars—even though they might be as in the dark as the rest of us. The implied responsibility stretches as far as anonymity in domain purchasing and the use of cryptocurrencies. An anonymous domain purchase apparently becomes a suspect act, rather than a basic right in a world where privacy increasingly feels like an endangered species. Warner’s fixation on crypto transactions and anonymous domains is a convenient bridge to legislative oversight. But should the use of cryptocurrency or private domain registrations be automatically linked to malicious intent? If so, where does that leave all the individuals, journalists, and even corporations that use these tools precisely because they offer protection against prying eyes? Are they guilty by association? Warner’s approach smacks of casting a suspicious eye on the very idea of privacy, branding it as a gateway drug to corruption and chaos. Moving Up the Stack – And Into the Gray Area The senator’s push for more “oversight” and “accountability” sounds benign until you realize it includes proposing legislative actions targeting how domains are registered. The problem with “oversight” of this kind is that it quickly turns into a game of gatekeeping. Who decides when privacy becomes a cover for nefarious intentions? And if this gatekeeping becomes normalized, what’s to stop other forms of expression from being scrutinized and ultimately stifled? Warner’s office is taking what feels like the classic Washington approach—expanding a legitimate problem to justify sweeping new powers. The fact that the domain companies have, so far, not publicly responded to Warner’s inquiries is no doubt unnerving for them. Should they acknowledge responsibility for bad actors? If they admit any level of complicity, the floodgates open to a future where the government can lean on domain providers to police any content it finds objectionable. Should they push back, they risk public backlash painted in the colors of “failing to protect democracy.” Warner isn’t backing down, making it clear that his vision of the future includes tighter controls on the “wild west” of the internet. As Warner pushes Congress toward what he calls a “balanced” stance on speech, it’s worth remembering that every new level of oversight is another precedent. If domain registrars become the first layer of censorship, where does it end? Today it’s anonymous domains and cryptic currency. Tomorrow, perhaps, it’s political dissenters and media critics, all kept in line by digital censors masquerading as infrastructure companies. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Slippery Slope to Censorship: Senator Warner’s Push to Police Web Infrastructure For Disinformation appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Microsoft is busy inventing new phrases to make sure that, what the tech giant and its likes consider “inclusivity,” is properly reflected in Microsoft Word. But at least as far as words, “mother” and “father” are concerned, this inclusivity seems to, paradoxically, work by exclusion. Gone are the days when Word offered spelling and grammar checks. Now, for people who like their writing software to nudge and prod them during the writing process by suggesting “more suitable” replacements, Word has something called “Inclusivity Checker.” The repository of terms contained in the tool, that are recommended to be replaced, is only growing. A modern update takes a dim view of the expression “maternity leave” on “gender-inclusivity” grounds, and suggests that it be replaced with “birth-related leave,” “parental leave,” or “childbirth leave.” Fathers who go on paternity leave should instead be described as taking “child-bonding leave,” Microsoft thinks. All this is explained as a way to make sure that the writer is inclusive of “all genders.” Is all this really necessary? Microsoft thinks it is. According to the Free Speech Union, one of the terms writers who, for some reason, use Word are advised to replace is Postman Pat: it should be “Postal Worker Pat,” according to those behind this effort. In that case, the intent is to avoid the possibility of gender bias. The same goes for “biologically female” – a phrase best avoided, according to Microsoft. The feature is at this time not hard-coded into Word: the software is “inclusive” of both opt-ins (this seems to be the default) and opt-outs. “Problematic” words are underlined in blue and then recommended alternatives pop up. Right now, there is no auto-correct function, either. But, if critics compare this sort of thing as moving ever closer to Orwell’s dark dystopian world ruled by extreme censorship and government control – one never knows what’s around the corner. And if you don’t like it, and thought you might switch to, oh, Google Docs? Bad news: this giant also has a similar feature, introduced in 2022. Google frowns at terms such as “housewife” and “landlord” and would rather you write, “stay-at-home spouse” and, “property owner.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Microsoft’s “Inclusivity Checker” Sparks Fears of a Looming “Speech Police,” Flagging Terms Like “Mother” and “Father” for More “Gender-Neutral” Alternatives appeared first on Reclaim The Net.