Latest news with #HansLucas
Boston Globe
16 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Boston Globe
The nine most annoying people you'll meet at the beach — and their cabanas, music, and sports equipment
It's almost enough to make you nostalgic for the days when people complained about the 'When you living your life your way starts to harm the people around you, [you need to rein] it in,' read one particularly popular comment. 'Wake the hell up.' Wake the hell up??? Is this the beach we're talking about — or the Advertisement Maybe I'm misremembering, but at some point wasn't the beach the poster location for, you know, relaxation? Feel the sand between your toes and all that . Get Love Letters: The Newsletter A weekly dispatch with all the best relationship content and commentary – plus exclusive content for fans of Love Letters, Dinner With Cupid, weddings, therapy talk, and more. Enter Email Sign Up On some beaches, mainly south of Massachusetts, the tension over the pop-up shade villages has gotten so intense that officials (on the Jersey Shore, in Myrtle Beach, S.C., and Ocean City, Md.) have laid down 'shade policies' restricting or banning the structures. Related : Alas, not unlike the Lone Star tick, tents and cabanas are multiplying — 'Umbrellas, canopies or sport-brellas Advertisement The SPF 50-rated McMansions are the latest irritant, but hardly the only one. With several weeks of summer remaining, here's a ranking of the nine worst people you'll meet on the sand. No one likes a Smokey the Beach Bum. VINCENT FEURAY/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images Smokey the Beach Bum The world is this person's ashtray. This offender not only smokes in nature, but litters butts around his blanket, your blanket, and manages to make paradise feel like a dive bar parking lot at 2 a.m. It's enough to make you wish he would vape. The Seashell Sargent She spends the entire day berating the spouse, the kids, and the kids' friends. People aren't eating enough of the food she spent all morning preparing. Or they're hogging it all. They're spending too much time in the water. Or not enough. After what we've paid for parking! You've unintentionally bought a front-row ticket to the most depressing soap opera on the beach. A seagull with a snack at Crane Beach in 2022. Stan Grossfeld/Globe Staff Lord of the Fries The guy on the next towel over gave a gull part of his burger, and now word has gone out in the sky: free food 17 feet southwest of the lifeguard stand. You're in a real-life scene from " Chad from Marketing Spends the entire afternoon on an endless stream of business calls. Yelling about key performance indicators, synergy, and 'touching base' like the beach is a WeWork with a good Zoom background. The Trespasser Stomps across your blanket like it's a public thoroughfare, not noticing as he kicks sand in your hummus, rumples your carefully smoothed set-up, and almost runs over the baby with his enormous $500 wagon. Advertisement A crowded at Coast Guard Beach in Eastham last summer. John Tlumacki/Globe Staff The Olympian Look, buddy, we're glad you enjoy every land, sea, and sand sport known to man and Amazon Prime. But we're not charmed by the shuttlecocks, footballs, frisbees, and kites coming our way at all times. We came to the beach to let down our guard — not to play goalie. The Close Talker, Beach Edition This family sets up about three inches from your turf, even though there are miles of open beach. Why? They're too lazy to walk even a few minutes (OK, you were, too, but you got here first). They're having so much fun, and have brought so many supplies, that pretty soon their stuff starts to bleed onto your towel, forcing you to spend the afternoon patrolling a border only you are focused on. Two beach-goers played football a respectful distance from others in June of 2020. It's no fun when you're having to dodge stray balls. Blake Nissen for the Boston Globe The Self-Appointed DJ Announces his arrival on the beach with a walk-on song and things only get louder from there. Decides the beach needs his playlist — and it's heavy on electronic dance music. You came to the beach to listen to the birds and the sound of the waves in real life. Now your only move is to put on your noise-canceling headphones and pull up the 'beach sounds' app on your phone. The Land Grabber She hits the beach at 5:30 a.m., sets up her multiple cabanas and chairs in a primo spot, then — her turf claimed — heads home. The villa sits empty until 11 a.m. when she strolls back to claim her oceanfront view. If you don't like it, tough. The lifeguard is her nephew. Advertisement The Universe OK, not technically a person, but rather everyone and everything that has conspired to put you in a bad mood before you even got to the beach. Traffic that turns a one-hour trip into a three-hour ordeal, with the arrival time ticking ever upward. Nonresident parking fees that have hit $45 on weekends in Gloucester, and, oh, And worst of all: The beach isn't always as perfect as you'd hoped — but even so, it's what you'll pine for come winter. Beth Teitell can be reached at
Scotsman
5 days ago
- Business
- Scotsman
What Claire's Accessories' US bankruptcy means for UK shops
Once a teen shopping staple, the brand could vanish from UK high streets as changes loom 💔 Sign up to the weekly Cost Of Living newsletter. Saving tips, deals and money hacks. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Claire's US parent company has filed for bankruptcy for the second time The UK arm is not directly affected but is now under review Attempts to sell the 280-store UK business have so far failed Sources say a UK administration filing is increasingly likely Some stores could close as part of a possible restructure or sale The future of a once-thriving high street staple hangs in the balance, as its US parent company files for bankruptcy, sparking fears that UK stores could be next in line for cuts or closures. For generations of British teenagers, Claire's Accessories has been a rite of passage — the go-to spot for getting your ears pierced, picking up sparkly jewellery, and loading up on scrunchies and hair clips before a school disco. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But now, the American-owned fashion and jewellery chain has entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in Delaware, citing rising debt, dwindling footfall, and a challenging retail landscape. It's the second time Claire's has filed for bankruptcy, following a similar move in 2018. (Photo: RICCARDO MILANI/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images) | Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images Despite wiping $1.9 billion (£1.4bn) from its books during its last restructuring, the company says it's been hit hard by weak consumer spending and ongoing supply chain issues. Claire's CEO Chris Cramer said the decision to file for bankruptcy was 'difficult but necessary' given the brand's current financial obligations, rising competition, and the ongoing shift away from brick-and-mortar retail. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Our employees have continued to work diligently in a constantly evolving consumer landscape to deliver amazing products and experiences for our customers,' he said. 'We remain committed to serving our customers and partnering with our vendors and landlords in other regions during this time.' The accessories chain is alsofacing the prospect of administration in the UK, as attempts to sell its 300-store British business appear to be faltering. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad What does it mean for UK stores? Claire's currently operates around 280 UK stores as part of a global network of more than 2,700 outlets across 17 countries. While the UK arm is not directly affected by the US bankruptcy proceedings, its future is now under review. According to reports, Claire's has brought in advisers from Interpath to explore a possible sale or restructuring of its UK business, but has so far failed to attract a viable buyer, according to Sky News. Retail turnaround firm Hilco, the owner of Lakeland, was reportedly among those interested in acquiring the UK operations, but is now understood to have pulled out, with other potential buyers also walking away due to the scale of the company's financial challenges. Sources told Sky that a formal administration filing this month is becoming increasingly likely. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Could your local Claire's close? For now, all UK stores remain open, and customers can still shop in-store and online. But with the business undergoing a strategic review, some locations could be vulnerable to closure. Those in underperforming shopping centres or high streets already hit hard by wider retail decline are particularly likely to be affected by any future moves to shutter British branches of Claire's More updates are expected in the coming months, but shoppers and fans alike are being urged to make the most of Claire's while they still can. Are you struggling to make ends meet as costs continue to rise? You can now send your stories to us online via YourWorld at It's free to use and, once checked, your story will appear on our website and, space allowing, in our newspapers.
Scotsman
5 days ago
- Business
- Scotsman
What Claire's Accessories' US bankruptcy means for UK shops
Once a teen shopping staple, the brand could vanish from UK high streets as changes loom 💔 Sign up to the weekly Cost Of Living newsletter. Saving tips, deals and money hacks. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Claire's US parent company has filed for bankruptcy for the second time The UK arm is not directly affected but is now under review Attempts to sell the 280-store UK business have so far failed Sources say a UK administration filing is increasingly likely Some stores could close as part of a possible restructure or sale The future of a once-thriving high street staple hangs in the balance, as its US parent company files for bankruptcy, sparking fears that UK stores could be next in line for cuts or closures. For generations of British teenagers, Claire's Accessories has been a rite of passage — the go-to spot for getting your ears pierced, picking up sparkly jewellery, and loading up on scrunchies and hair clips before a school disco. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But now, the American-owned fashion and jewellery chain has entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in Delaware, citing rising debt, dwindling footfall, and a challenging retail landscape. It's the second time Claire's has filed for bankruptcy, following a similar move in 2018. (Photo: RICCARDO MILANI/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images) | Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images Despite wiping $1.9 billion (£1.4bn) from its books during its last restructuring, the company says it's been hit hard by weak consumer spending and ongoing supply chain issues. Claire's CEO Chris Cramer said the decision to file for bankruptcy was 'difficult but necessary' given the brand's current financial obligations, rising competition, and the ongoing shift away from brick-and-mortar retail. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Our employees have continued to work diligently in a constantly evolving consumer landscape to deliver amazing products and experiences for our customers,' he said. 'We remain committed to serving our customers and partnering with our vendors and landlords in other regions during this time.' The accessories chain is alsofacing the prospect of administration in the UK, as attempts to sell its 300-store British business appear to be faltering. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad What does it mean for UK stores? Claire's currently operates around 280 UK stores as part of a global network of more than 2,700 outlets across 17 countries. While the UK arm is not directly affected by the US bankruptcy proceedings, its future is now under review. According to reports, Claire's has brought in advisers from Interpath to explore a possible sale or restructuring of its UK business, but has so far failed to attract a viable buyer, according to Sky News. Retail turnaround firm Hilco, the owner of Lakeland, was reportedly among those interested in acquiring the UK operations, but is now understood to have pulled out, with other potential buyers also walking away due to the scale of the company's financial challenges. Sources told Sky that a formal administration filing this month is becoming increasingly likely. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Could your local Claire's close? For now, all UK stores remain open, and customers can still shop in-store and online. But with the business undergoing a strategic review, some locations could be vulnerable to closure. Those in underperforming shopping centres or high streets already hit hard by wider retail decline are particularly likely to be affected by any future moves to shutter British branches of Claire's More updates are expected in the coming months, but shoppers and fans alike are being urged to make the most of Claire's while they still can.
Scotsman
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Online Safety Act: Wikipedia could ‘introduce cap' in UK
Wikipedia has challenged part of the Online Safety Act in the High Court 🚨 Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Wikipedia could be forced to cap UK users, it has claimed. The website has raised privacy concerns about a part of the Online Safety Act. Wikimedia Foundation has challenged part of the bill in the High Court. A cap on the number of visitors able to use Wikipedia could be introduced, it has been warned. Wikimedia Foundation, the outfit behind the website, is challenging the Government's new Online Safety Act in the High Court over concerns about how it could impact the privacy of its volunteers. The case was heard last week, but a decision has yet to be returned. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The nonprofit is particularly concerned about the Categorisation Regulations contained within the bill, and how the website could be in the top tier: category one. It would require Wikipedia to enforce ID verification on its anonymous voluntary moderators, as well as visitors. In a statement announcing the legal challenge earlier this year, Wikimedia said: 'Category 1 demands would undermine the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer contributors, expose the encyclopedia to manipulation and vandalism, and divert essential resources from protecting people and improving Wikipedia, one of the world's most trusted and widely used digital public goods.' The foundation does add that it is not 'bringing a general challenge to the OSA as a whole', simply to the categorisation regulations. Wikipedia would fall under category one - which includes websites that have an average number of monthly UK users that 34 million and uses a content recommender system, or has more than 7 million monthly users, uses a content recommender system, and provides a functionality for users to forward or share regulated user-generated content on the service with other users of that service. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Wikipedia is challenging part of the Online Safety Act in the UK High Court | Riccardo Milani / Hans Lucas /AFP via Getty Images Stephen LaPorte, General Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation, said: 'The Court has an opportunity in this case to set a global precedent for protecting public interest projects online.' Biometric Update reports that the foundation has warned category one rules would 'undermine the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer contributors, expose the encyclopedia to manipulation and vandalism, and divert essential resources from protecting people and improving Wikipedia, one of the world's most trusted and widely used digital public goods.' The website added that in court, Wikipedia's lawyers floated the idea of a monthly quota to keep it below the Category 1 threshold, meaning that UK access to Wikipedia could become less like browsing the web and more like trying to buy a concert ticket, with a cap on how many people get in.
Scotsman
28-07-2025
- Scotsman
Online Safety Act: Wikipedia could ‘introduce cap' in UK
Wikipedia has challenged part of the Online Safety Act in the High Court 🚨 Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Wikipedia could be forced to cap UK users, it has claimed. The website has raised privacy concerns about a part of the Online Safety Act. Wikimedia Foundation has challenged part of the bill in the High Court. A cap on the number of visitors able to use Wikipedia could be introduced, it has been warned. Wikimedia Foundation, the outfit behind the website, is challenging the Government's new Online Safety Act in the High Court over concerns about how it could impact the privacy of its volunteers. The case was heard last week, but a decision has yet to be returned. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The nonprofit is particularly concerned about the Categorisation Regulations contained within the bill, and how the website could be in the top tier: category one. It would require Wikipedia to enforce ID verification on its anonymous voluntary moderators, as well as visitors. In a statement announcing the legal challenge earlier this year, Wikimedia said: 'Category 1 demands would undermine the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer contributors, expose the encyclopedia to manipulation and vandalism, and divert essential resources from protecting people and improving Wikipedia, one of the world's most trusted and widely used digital public goods.' The foundation does add that it is not 'bringing a general challenge to the OSA as a whole', simply to the categorisation regulations. Wikipedia would fall under category one - which includes websites that have an average number of monthly UK users that 34 million and uses a content recommender system, or has more than 7 million monthly users, uses a content recommender system, and provides a functionality for users to forward or share regulated user-generated content on the service with other users of that service. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Wikipedia is challenging part of the Online Safety Act in the UK High Court | Riccardo Milani / Hans Lucas /AFP via Getty Images Stephen LaPorte, General Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation, said: 'The Court has an opportunity in this case to set a global precedent for protecting public interest projects online.' Biometric Update reports that the foundation has warned category one rules would 'undermine the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer contributors, expose the encyclopedia to manipulation and vandalism, and divert essential resources from protecting people and improving Wikipedia, one of the world's most trusted and widely used digital public goods.' The website added that in court, Wikipedia's lawyers floated the idea of a monthly quota to keep it below the Category 1 threshold, meaning that UK access to Wikipedia could become less like browsing the web and more like trying to buy a concert ticket, with a cap on how many people get in. Phil Bradley-Schmieg, Lead Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation, explained: 'We are taking action now to protect Wikipedia's volunteers, as well as the global accessibility and integrity of free knowledge. We call on the Court to defend the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer contributors from flawed legislation'.
