Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Animation has taken anthropomorphism to a whole new level. This video from Disney’s Research Hub, based in Pittsburgh in the US, breaks down the steps by which the studio take human motion data and uses it to animate objects so that they move like… us.
Advertisement
Check out the anglepoise lamp emoting ‘sad’ at 2.35. Or the angry penguin straight afterwards. Cute.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
@Cal Mooney: They’re hiding the Skripals from me, you ,the gardai, the Journal.ie, and your fake National Insurance number for the dole you got them to pay in to your bank account in Saling rad over the past 20 years. You’re a poverty stricken Oligarch.
@wattsed: i am irish born and bred, unlike all the london based fake accounts on here. Everyone knows that when your arguments dont stack up, you go personal. We all see through the british fake accounts.
@Cal Mooney: You may be Irish born Wally but your comments history shows your ultimate allegiance is to whatever tinpot foreign regime opposes your domestic enemies. You will sweep all of Putin’s bigotry, corruption, human rights abuses and lack of democratic accountability under the carpet and ferociously defend him in the face of fact, logic and reason, just because you managed to delude yourself that your enemy’s enemy is your friend.
@Harry Whitehead: ok harry, 1 million dead in iraq on false british intellugence. 30 million in famine in yemen today, because the brits want to make a fast buck. Open slave markets in libya becuase britain wanted to bring democracy to that country. Every country they engahe with turns to crap. What part of this is untrue. Answer me.
@Cal Mooney: The only true part is the bit about Iraq, but even then you couldn’t resist twisting and inflating it to such bullshit proportions it loses any credibility. And as ever, pure whataboutery.
@ihcalaM: please explain how cal has distorted the facts because what he has said seems pretty much on the mark to me. Doesn’t seem like you have much of an argument.
@Harry Whitehead: again you offer no evidence as to how cal is wrong. Is it just your default position that everyone is full of shit but you? How about making a valid defence of your position rather than just resorting to calling everyone names. I can almost see you taking the milk money from all the other children.
@Harry Whitehead: Harry what has thumbs up got to do with this? I would imagine its because most free thinking people agree with Cal Mooney. This was obviously another massive lie from the Brits and the longer it goes on the more guilty they appear. Our govt rowed in behind them like the good sycophants they are. If you believe differently thats your opinion but don’t try and belittle others just because they have a differing view to yours. Thumbs up, lol. Is that the best deflection you can come up with?
@Ivan Connolly: Oh I see how it works. Wally makes a ridiculous claim like ‘the Brits are responsible for 30 million starving in Yemen’ but somehow the onus is on me to prove this is false, not the other way round (oddly though you don’t ask Wally to prove the Kremlin wasn’t responsible for Salisbury). I already pointed out ages ago that if you’re going to directly blame the UK for Yemen due to arms salesto the Saudis, you’d better consider Russia’s own record in arms sales to despotic regimes VERY carefully indeed.
@Frank Cauldhame: LMAO pull the other one. If most ‘free thinking’ people agree with Wally, where exactly are all the furious protests over Leo’s decision? I only mention the upticks because it’s classic bot behaviour. You find similar stunts being pulled on Trump-related articles.
@Charles Williams: dont trust Russia , previous for this sort of behaviour. One thing you can be sure of is that between the British and Russian security services we will never get the full truth.
@Gus Sheridan: __ These victims seem to be a lot healthier than previous victims of “odd poisonings”, perhaps professionals weren’t involved this time? It could be a quintuple bluff, but whatever’s going on, it’s a bleedin’ mystery.
@Charles Williams: of course Putin was behind it… ffs… the guy is a meglomaniac with setious aspirations.. this is a calculated next step move flexing Russias muscles… he wants the headlines more than Trump.
@EdmundOrlando: honestly, i look at all the false flags and spurious justifications the brits gave for iraq, libya, yemen and syria. That is the reason i dont believe them on this one. In each of their false flag justifications, its the civilians who die at their hands. 1 million in iraq. Libya with open slave markets. 30 million in famine in yemen. They are evil. Not the british people, but the governments who lie to their people to justify mass killings.
@Cal Mooney: wow, but Cal, you didn’t quote population. In fact you were unspecific enough to allow someone reading to interpret it as 30 million dead as a result of famine or 30 million struggling through a famine. Who are the 2.42 million that are not in famine or dead?
@Cal Mooney: find me where the UN says that the entire population of Yemen plus 2.42 million people in Yemen and suffering a famine. Truth is you’re way off. It’s still a massive number so I have no idea why you’d lie about it
@EdmundOrlando: don’t forget to look at British history too. Russia isn’t the only state seeking to reaffirm its position in the world. Don’t forget “let’s make Britain great again”.
Intersesting video from Craig Murray – A former British Ambassador and Historian.
According to him the original soviet chem weapons facility was in Uzbekistan (then part of Soviet empire) – It was dismantled by the Americans between 1999 and 2002, Indeed he said he even attended a farewell party when they finished.
All the lab notes and equipment and stuff went with the Americans.
@Pearse Mc Mullen: This was actually reported in the Irish Times by a retired journalist whose name escapes me – he was a previous Russia correspondent.
This was the day after the Salisbury incident.
Haven’t heard from since and the IT obviously made an editorial decision to go the whole hog in supporting their NATO allies.
@Dessie Deratta:
Obviously everyone doing their Utmost to blame Russia, no matter What proof they may, or may Not have, and it clearly is looking as if they have Nothing whatsoever Dessie!
Wonder when it becomes obvious the brits or yanks were real perpetrators will Leo still be claiming that Ireland cannot remain neutral on chemical weapons
@Moss Cotter: my money is on Ireland as the culprit. If not Ireland, it was possibly Iceland. Or it might have been another State.
It could not have been Russia because Russia is the primary defender of democracy, the rule of law and human rights in the world. Putin is a living Saint. The Pope may considering canonising Putin.
Iceland is looking a bit shifty at the moment.
As for the niece Putin wants her to go to England as a carer. That’s the kind of humanitarian thing that St Putin of Russia is noted for. Putin is even kind to Trump and has been helping the US with its democratic processes.
@Michael Lang: What a load of rambling childish nonsense,can’t you just stop. The accusers must come up evidence, there is none, except witch trial standard accusations. Just give up.
@Dave O Keeffe: according to the brits they were. They also claimed the cop who found them was on deaths door, but magically 7 days later he was discharged fit and well from hospital. The point being the brits are putting out big hairy lies from the start on this.
@Cal Mooney: I’d like them to explain how they confirmed it was actually a novichok so quickly. I don’t know how they could confirm the structure if they don’t already have a sample that they synthesised themselves to compare it to and then used GC-MS. I also don’t think the synthesis looks that difficult- all this stuff about “it must have been a state actor” and so on. There are plenty of drugs equally difficult to manufacture and criminals manage that just fine.
@Smelly Chemist:
They didn’t. The attack was on 4th April, Novichok wasn’t mentioned until 13th April.
This is all readily verifiable despite the claims of bullshit artists like Cal that Novichok was being reported as the substance responsible within two hours of the attack.
@Harry Whitehead: instead of attacking the commentators directly, go on and explain the very suspicious behaviour of the brits refusing family members visas to visit.
Telling Lies is what Britain does best, just look at the Warmonger Blair, and his ( So Called ) Weapons of Mass Destruction, ready to be used at 15minutes notice! Look at the Thousands if innocent lives that cost in Iraq, for No apparent reason, only on an Excuse to invade another country for its Wealth, and Resources.
@Ivan Connolly:
No misquote there – that’s exactly what Cal has claimed on several occasions. I called him a bullshit artist because he frequently posts bullshit claims.
Offensive? Maybe.
Apt? Definitely.
@Dessie Deratta: But they did not found nerve gas. They found compounds your body contain after contact with nerve gas. Those compounds are pretty much the same as you will have after food poisoning too.
Go figure.
@Pat Patovic:
Says who??
If what you say is true the OPCW will report back that they found zero evidence of nerve agents. If not will you admit you were wrong/lying?
@Walt Jabsco: if they report back saying there is no proof that the russians did it and that any number of countries or individuals carried out the attack, will you and your ilk accept you were wrong to assume the russians were the only possible players. Your givernment said that no one other than the rusdians had this poison. Were they lieing?
@Walt Jabsco:
If the OPCW report back with specific proof that someone with no connection to Russia did it I will indeed admit I was wrong.
If they don’t will you admit you were wrong?
@Cal Mooney:
You’re changing your narrative on this as frequently as the Kremlin. Earlier it was ‘food poisoning or Weils disease’, now is back to being ‘an attack’ again.
You’d want to make your mind up.
It would seem the british have been caught with their willy in one hand and a finger up their bum,very interesting times ahead,i wonder how our wonderful leader is feeling ???
On Sky news they are reporting that the niece said they got I’ll from food poisoning.
I found it funny when I opened the story here and in the middle there was an ad for Burger King
@Míleata Watch Co: I don’t know what Sky News you are watching but I have seen no such story today or yesterday. So let’s see the link to the Sky News story you are referring to.
Not been a good few weeks for Theresa May. Repeated attempts at discrediting Corbyn ending in dismal failure and now this web of lies is starting to unravel.
If you listen to the Phone Call yesterday you will hear Victoria Skripal telling Julia that if she gets a visa to tell the British to let her visit the hospital. Julia can can be heard saying “No”. Julia has so far, refused to speak to anyone from the Russian Embassy, and she would know that her Cousin would be accompanied by minders from the Embassy. She even told her Cousin the British will not give you a visa. How would she know that unless she herself asked them not to.
One only had to look at the reaction from where she works when the story first broke. Over 100 over her work colleagues were asked for a comment and most denied even knowing her. And those that did acknowledge her refused to make any comment other than they knew her. People were afraid to say anything.
@Dessie Deratta: What, stuff that can be verified from a recording? Yeah, much less credible than an online diagnosis of food poisoning/Weil’s Disease.
@Harry Whitehead: harry, you are reporting from the nest in london. The rest of us are irish living in Ireland not buying the crap you and your government are trying to sell us.
@Mick Jordan: yesterday you said you doubted the authenticity of the recirding because it seemed fake. Today, you claim its gospel. Do you have these epitomes very often?
@Cal Mooney: Speak for yourself. I’m Irish, living in Ireland, and I’m not buying what Russia are selling, with their hilariously all-over-the-place statements on this in the past few weeks (if you thought the Brits were bad, have a look back at some of the rubbish spouted by the Russian ministry of Defence).
If you’re going to criticise the Brits, fire ahead (preferably with a bit more coherence), but it’s very telling that you haven’t once admitted that the famously honest Russian regime may be telling big fat ones in an effort to cover up what would be the latest in a long line of murderous adventures.
@Cal Mooney: Again Wally, there goes this bizarre fixation of yours with my city. Try and come up with a more original line of attack. Your own nationality certain hasn’t precluded you from denying, deflecting or in a few cases even telling complete porkies – any luck yet in finding that quote where I allegedly called Yulia Skripal’s cousin a ‘liar’?
A MUST for the drones who fall for Western Deep State propaganda hook, line and sinker.
But that assumes the drones are not already committed members/supporters of the Deep State…which I suspect many of the Britbots and Pentagon groupies here are…not naming anyone in particular.
@Harry Whitehead: you claimed during the first week that only the russians had a poison like this. Lets see what the opcw say. Is that fair? If they say that only the russians could have carried out thus attack i will eat my words on here. If they dont, i will ask you very politely to take back all the false claims you made.
@Harry Whitehead: @Harry Whitehead: What’s this? A smug, patronising ill-informed Englishman? Ignorant of his country’s reprehensible colonial past, continued racism and his government’s long record of deception and war crimes? No, never seen that before! So uppity us Irish eh? Sure, we should just believe everything they say. They’ve never led us astray!
@Cal Mooney: I highly doubt the OPCW have a mandate to assign blame. They didn’t do it in Syria, and relied on a UN joint mechanism to do so.
So your premise is unreasonable. The OPCW are likely unable to say who is behind the attack (conclusively) even if the evidence is overwhelming as it is beyond their remit. They can, however, point us in the right direction (state vs. non-state actors, Novichok or not, for example). We’ll see.
@ihcalaM: the opcw can say who created the agent. If they are unanle to point the finger at russia, the brits are shown up for the habitual liars they are.
“the poor things were killed by thirst, having been sealed inside the Skripals’ house by investigators. The cat was in such a distressed state when a vet eventually gained entry that it was euthanised, reportedly at Porton Down.”
And this is from a sneering piece in the Guardian, not RT or Sputnik.
@Dessie Deratta:
What’s your point, or are you suggesting it’s all part of the conspiracy to kill the guinea pigs so they can’t tell the media what really happened?
@Walt Jabsco: i am pretty sure he is saying the brits have lied from start to finish on this one. There must be a lot of sweaty bums in the conservative party right now trying to justify refusing a visa to a family member of the victims. The brits have been caught lieing once again. They no longer have any credibility.
Would suggest chem agent on door handle must of been liquid, but can’t imagine anyone walking away from that even the comparable healthy mustard gas destroyed lungs serious health issues, this would be far more potent, but not a bad kebab story either.
Russia keen to put Britain down, walked them into Brexit and away from EU , now looks like about to discredit them internationally, Trumps US happy to walk away from Nato given the right opening. Truly if Putin walked into Poland , Estonia, without a US backed response what response is there. Can’t imagine their would there be gun fire just the use of the word unacceptable alot and talk of sanctions.
Further proof,,,, cats can’t use door handle (insert smiley face here) .
‘in solidarity with Britain’. Jaysus. Who would’ve thought expelling a Russian diplomat before we had any clue what happened would’ve made us look like idiots!? Oh ya – most of the country! Varadkar doing his best impersonation of Dotard Trump.
Swedish journalist jailed following BBC reporter's deportation from Turkey amid protests
Updated
13 mins ago
5.4k
48
occupied territories bill
Senator Frances Black 'open to the conversation' of running for president
43 mins ago
2.8k
17
arctic reception
JD Vance says US take over of Greenland ‘makes sense’ during scaled back visit
Updated
3 hrs ago
40.8k
128
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 161 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 110 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 143 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 113 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 39 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 35 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 134 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 61 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 74 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 37 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 46 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 27 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 92 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 99 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 72 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 53 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 88 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 69 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say