There’s two that I’m aware of, but I’m sure there’s more. https://www.project2025.observer/en

https://progressivereform.org/tracking-trump-2/project-2025-executive-action-tracker/

Mediocre Mario doesn’t have the same kind of ring to it… actually, I take that back. We were robbed!

Wii Switch has different connotations in other communities…

Very cool. It’s so interesting to read the noted interactions they were able to glean from the prints. It looks like PBS Nova has a documentary on this, I’ll have to look it up!

They literally say there will be an IP that will have come out since 1976 (“and not based on 50+ year old intellectual property”). That is any IP that has or will come out since then. Such as the 90s, not exclusively one that hasn’t been thought of yet. Goddamn. And to think some people might want to discuss what might fit that criteria. But others chime in, arguing that they have issues with reading comprehension. “Ackchyually, they haven’t been thought of yet”. Cool dude.

At this point you’re just a troll.

Ok, let’s start over, since you don’t seem to be getting it. Stop getting hung up on Star Wars. No shit they chose Star Wars.

OP said an example of Massive IP, and put forth that there’ll be a new, original one that will have been created within the last 50 years. With me so far?

Someone said they didn’t know why I was being down voted. You said

Because those aren’t new?

The examples I gave fit the criteria of the statement: other examples of original IPs that were created after 1976 to become massive IPs. These IPs were just other examples of newer IPs. Still with me? The OP stated some criteria and there are already examples that fit that criteria. There will continue to be other examples that fit that criteria as time goes on, ad nausem.

So off the bat, your original comment on this thread and on other other threads seem off base. There will always be a new, original IP that blows up. That’s a nothing burger. Naturally, culture will find something new to obsess about, something that resonates with people. Should my comment have just been to read the post and say, “Yes, how thought provoking! There could be someone who is starting to come up with ideas right now that will become a massive IP later. How deep!”? If that’s your correct interpretation that I’m not “getting”, no shit. That’s nothing to discuss because it’s so obvious.

Talking about other examples is a way to create conversation on this thread. People can debate if Pokemon, or Jurassic Park, or even the Simpsons fit the criteria. What other examples of IPs have come out after 1976 fit? Maybe these IPs don’t at the moment, but they might blow up in the near future, not unlike how Snoopy has really blown up more recently.

Maybe Snoopy will be the next big thing, could you imagine? Some cultural touchstone that has come back after it’s heyday. That’s not unlike Marvel, where they were big for a while, faced bankruptcy, and then became huge in the last 10 years. That’s more interesting, and worth discussing than to just post “Oh my god, how true.” That’s something that you don’t seem to get.

No shit Star Wars was an example of an IP that was a cultural touchstone. That’s the whole point of the post. That a massive IP would come out, but would have been original and created in the last 50 years (sorry Lord of the Rings).

And you can’t tell me that Harry Potter nor Game of Thrones haven’t reached a cultural significance. The post said nothing about interconnected universes, you should really get off that, since you seem to have inferred that from who knows where. If you say to a random person “Winter is coming” or “Voldemort” or hell, even “Potter” almost everyone is going to think of either IP. Those are examples of a cultural touchstone from the last 30 years.

hot take: a new Star Wars or Marvel will emerge in our lifetimes. something completely original and not based on 50+ year old intellectual property…

The original post said a new “Star Wars” not and then not an IP from over 50 years ago. Not that the IP just came out this year or however you want to define “new”.

The very first Harry Potter book came out came out in 1997, which was almost 30 years ago. A Game Of Thrones came out in 1996, exactly 30 years ago. Both blew up and were massive cultural touchstones, not unlike how Star Wars is/was.

Harry Potter is the one that comes to mind. Also Game of Thrones if you’d like. Both really blew up, have spin offs and staying power. Harry Potter has toys, video games, and amusement parks.

I think the implication is that this guy asked a woman to be his girlfriend, then cheated on her. When he was caught, he said that he only asked if He could be her boyfriend, but never claimed that she was his girlfriend, leaving him free to have other relationships. It’s a twisted logic that’s gaslighting the woman…

deleted by creator

Maybe our confusion is the topical part…

What took so long? Were they stallin’?

I’m all about this subject matter, but this article is written in such a weird way, both on its style and structure.

A short and unfinished essay of about 5,000 words, written in 1876, shortly after the publication of Darwin’s The Descent of Man (1871), the title is a gendered mistranslation from the original German: “Anteil de Arbeit an der Menschwerdung des Affen”–“Menschwerdung” means “incarnation” or “becoming human,” not “man.”

Ok, yes, Man with a capital M back then was a stand in for human. That seems kind pedantic to point out when the article isn’t about that.

Today recognised as a foundational text, it builds on the recognition by earlier classical economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, that alongside nature itself, human labour is the only source of value–an analysis that was developed by Marx in Capital.

Engels takes this further: much further.

Ok, I guess you’re going to tell me how Engels takes it further in the next paragraph…

Marx and Engels were enthusiastic about Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species published in 1859. Marx declared that “Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.’”

Wait. Marx declared? What about Engels?

Darwin’s essentially materialist explanation for the variety and complexity of life challenged religious dogma. His sequel in 1871, full title The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex applies evolutionary theory to humans. It was particularly inspirational to Engels.

Oh, Engels took it much further because he was inspired by Darwin in particular. Oh wait, I still don’t know what the hell they’re trying to say…

My grandma was all about Keds back then. I don’t know that I really saw anyone else in a pair

Jinkies!

Didn’t the courts just say that Trump can’t put tariffs in place and had to refund companies for them? How the hell is he implementing new tariffs?

Or an airline catering cart

Same, I scrolled past and had to come back to upvote!