Image: John Lamparski/WireImage/Bastiaan Slabbers/NurPhoto via Getty Images/Mashable composite

Judging by Stephen King’s Twitter feed, there’s only one politician the horror master dislikes almost as much as Donald Trump, and that’s Ted Cruz.

King has been tweeting about Cruz for years now, but over the past six months — with the mid-terms approaching — he’s really been ramping things up.

Here are some recent examples.

That last tweet, posted back in June, prompted a response from Cruz himself, in which he described King as a “limousine liberal”. The horror master responded with this:

Over the past week, with the Texas Senate race on the horizon, King has continued his onslaught.

King’s latest barb was posted on Thursday night. At the time of writing it’s already been shared over 4000 times.

Ouch.

The Saudi-UAE military alliance at war with Yemen’s Houthis says it bombed Sanaa International Airport and an adjoining airbase which were allegedly being used to launch drone and ballistic missile attacks.

Colonel Turki al-Malki, the alliance’s spokesman, said on Friday that aviation at the airport and international aid efforts were not affected.

He told the kingdom’s al-Ekhbaria TV that a press conference would be held later in the day to provide evidence that the airport was being used by the Houthis to launch attacks.

The Houthi-affiliated Al-Masirah news outlet didn’t address the alliance’s claims, instead reporting that more than 30 strikes targeted the al-Dulaimi air base in Sanaa and its surrounding areas.

Sources in the capital, however, told Al Jazeera that the number of strikes was closer to 20.

The air attacks came just hours after Yemen’s internationally recognised government said it was ready to re-start peace talks with Houthis.

The Yemeni government said on Thursday that it welcomed “all efforts to restore peace” after the US and UN called on the warring parties to enter into negotiations planned for Sweden later this month.

US Defence Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanded an end to the war, including air strikes, in an implicit acknowledgement that the alliance was involved in the bombing of civilians.

Nasser Arrabyee, a Yemeni Journalist based in Sanaa, said the US’ 30-day deadline for the resumption of the talks was being interpreted by the Saudis and Emiratis to intensify their bombing campaign and reclaim territory from the rebels.

“If the US wanted to stop the war, it could stop it within a minute,” Arrabyee told Al Jazeera.

“Right now, the Houthis are willing to enter into negotiations because any negotiated solution is a victory for them.

“But it’s up to the Saudis, it’s up to the US to end the fighting as the Houthis will continue defending themselves,” he added.

Hodeidah offensive

On Tuesday, the Saudi-UAE alliance sent more than 10,000 troops to the port city of Hodeidah in a new offensive aimed at securing so-called “liberated areas”.

Hodeidah port is the main gateway for commercial imports and relief supplies into the country, and also carries strategic importance for the alliance.

Saudi and Emirati officials have alleged it is the main entry point for Iranian arms shipments to the Houthis, a charge Tehran and the rebels deny.

“The port of Hodeidah is a lifeline for millions of childen throughout Yemen, particularly in the northern parts,” Geert Cappelaere, the regional director of UNICEF, told Al Jazeera.

“Today, 1.8 million children under the age of five are facing acute malnutrition, and 400,000 are affected by severe acute malnutrition.

“So any offensive on Hodeidah is putting the lives of children at risk,” he said.

According to the Yemen Data Project, the Saudi-UAE alliance carried out at least 335 air raids on Hodeidah province between June 1 and September 30, with civilians frequently bearing the brunt.

At least 15 people were killed in September when raids hit a highway linking the city of Hodeidah with the capital, Sanaa.

The Saudi-UAE military alliance has acknowledged mistakes in its air operations but has mostly defended its record.

It has denied deliberately targeting civilians but the kingdom’s narrative over its actions in Yemen has faced mounting criticism following the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist.

Earlier this week, the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), an independent watchdog, said around 56,000 Yemenis had been killed in armed violence, a death toll five times higher reported by the UN.

The new Google Chromecast was conspicuously absent from the spotlight at Google’s recent hardware event. But there was indeed a new, updated version of Google’s streaming dongle; it’s just the company decided to roll it out quietly. Spend a few minutes with the new Chromecast and you’ll see why the company didn’t brag about the refresh at the event — there’s really nothing new to brag about.

Looking over the specs of this third-generation Chromecast, I thought a fitting tagline would be, “Meet the new Chromecast, almost the same as the old Chromecast.” Now that I’ve spend some serious time with the new model, I regret using “almost.”

Don’t get me wrong, the Google Chromecast overall is a fantastic streaming product for $35. It’s cheap, it’s small, it’s cheap, it’s out of the way, and did I mention it’s cheap? Also, I will say that the idea of just throwing content from your phone to your TV screen, aka “casting,” is still really cool if not exactly revolutionary anymore. At the core of what it does, the Google Chromecast works really well. If you don’t have one and you’re looking for an affordable way to stream content to your TV, Chromecast is a really great option.

That being said, I’m someone who already owns the previous model, the second-generation Chromecast. If you’re one of the tens of millions of people who, like me, already own a Chromecast, there’s really not much here for you.

Chromecast evolution

The jump from the first-generation Chromecast released in 2013 to the second-gen model in 2015 was a significant one. It was complete redesign, transforming from a stick to the circular-designed HDMI dongle you’re probably more familiar with.There was also a noticeable change in performance as the older device could be a bit laggy at times. 

Image: MATT BINDER/MASHABLE

In contrast, Google’s 2018 Chromecast is practically the same as the previous model. Save for a few more minor performance and appearance upgrades, you likely wouldn’t even tell the difference. The new third-gen Chromecast still comes in round dongle form, albeit there has been a change from a glossy plastic shell to a matte casing. The logo on the device has also changed from the Chrome graphic to Google’s little ‘G’ logo. While it certainly gives the device a nicer, sleeker look, you’ll rarely even see it, as the device will find its home plugged in to the back of your TV screen on most television sets.

Setting up the Google Chromecast is still quick, easy, and done entirely through the Google Home app on your smartphone. Because your phone is likely already connected to your WiFi network, I didn’t even need to input my WiFi password when setting up the new Chromecast.

While the older Chromecast model streamed at 1080p, one major performance upgrade with this latest version is that it now can stream at 60 frames per second. This fixes the choppiness mentioned in when it came to watching videogame streams and videos. However, if you’re not typically watching gamer Ninja’s latest Fortnite stream, you really won’t notice a difference. Google also claims the hardware performance of the new Chromecast is 15% faster. It certainly was fast in my testing, but I never really had any issues with my older model running slow. Also, since a Chromecast, by its nature, has no menus to scan through, it’s a fairly unnoticeable upgrade.

The Cast Achilles’ heel

Speaking of the user interface, one of my main issues with Chromecast has long been the fact that you have to use your phone to run the thing. Yes, I know that’s the point, but that means there’s no on-screen user interface at all, which isn’t always the best solution.

Using only your smartphone, you go to whatever video service app you want to watch like Netflix or Hulu and then “cast” the video to your Chromecast-connected TV screen. With other devices like the Apple TV ($149), or — even more analogous to the Chromecast — the Roku Express ($30) or the Amazon Fire Stick ($40), you can pick up the device’s remote and pause what you’re watching, raise and lower the volume, switch to another show or app, whatever! With Chromecast, there’s the extra step of unlocking your phone to change what you want to do on your Chromecast-connected TV set. You control it all from the video player options of the app you’re casting. 

In fact, my biggest pet peeve with Chromecast is that, if you receive a call on your smartphone, it won’t automatically pause what you’re watching. (It supposedly depends on the app, but in my years casting Netflix, HBO, and YouTube with the previous model, I’ve never seen this happen.) Every time, I’ve had to take the call while whatever I was watching awkwardly played in the background until I could bring up the app for whatever video service I was using to pause it. It’s a choice between that or declining the incoming call, pausing the video, and reaching back out to whoever called me. Annoying.

One new feature that could solve the phone call issue is the addition of Google Assistant to control your Chromecast. You can use your voice for some basic controls, like changing what you want to watch on Netflix or YouTube. It’s limited, but it works. The hiccup here is that you need a Google Home speaker or a phone with Google Assistant for this to even work. If you don’t already own one of those devices, you might as well splurge for a full-featured set-top streaming box like the Apple TV instead of getting these other Google Home devices if all you’re going to really use them for is a workaround for Chromecast’s standalone flaws.

An incremental upgrade

All in all, the new Chromecast is just as good as its predecessor. It’s just as bad, too. It can still be a bit clunky using your phone to cast. If you want to browse movies and shows to watch with your family, be prepared to gather around the smartphone screen, because again there’s no Chromecast menu options for your TV set. I guess you could cast your web browser and look at the web version of Netflix (or whatever service you’re using), but that’s an irritating extra step. There’s other little issues like changing the volume on your phone to control your Chromecast-connected TV’s audio, which isn’t always very responsive.

Speaking of sound, multiroom audio support is coming to the Chromecast by the end of the year, but that’s not necessarily a reason to buy this device: it’s supposedly rolling out to second-generation Chromecasts, too.

In my opinion, the Google Chromecast is a worthy secondary TV streaming device. However, if you already have one, there’s not a lot of reason to upgrade to this third-generation model — especially if you have the second-gen Chromecast. 

If you purchased a 4K TV since the older Chromecast model came out, the refreshed device isn’t the streaming option for you either. Google still has 4K streaming reserved solely for it’s more expensive Chromecast device, the now 2-year-old Chromecast Ultra ($69).

However, if you don’t already own a Chromecast and you’re not looking to stream 4K content, it’s certainly among the cheapest options to consider. I wouldn’t use it for my living room set where I watch TV socially with family and friends, but when it’s perfect for the bedroom and just want to put something on since it’s so straightforward.

However, if the lack of an onscreen menu doesn’t work for you, there are plenty other similarly priced options nowadays. For example, the Amazon Fire Stick offers all that and is currently only five bucks more than a Chromecast. Oh, right, that’s another thing! Amazon’s video app doesn’t support Google Cast. So, if you really want to stream some Amazon Prime video, Chromecast may not be the option for you.

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman held a rare meeting with American evangelical Christians as the conservative kingdom seeks to open up more to the world and repair an image of religious intolerance.

The delegation was led on Thursday by communications strategist Joel Rosenberg and included former US congresswoman Michele Bachmann, according to an emailed statement from the group, as well as heads of American evangelical organisations, some with ties to Israel.

“It was a historic moment for the Saudi crown prince to openly welcome evangelical Christian leaders to the palace. We were encouraged by the candour of the two-hour conversation with him today,” the statement said.

The delegation also met Saudi officials including Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi Ambassador to Washington Prince Khalid bin Salman, and secretary-general of the Muslim World League Mohammed al-Issa.

A visit by such prominent non-Muslim leaders, who estimate they represent about 60 million people, is a rare act of religious openness for Saudi Arabia, which hosts the holiest sites in Islam and bans the practice of other religions.

Some of the figures’ support for Israel, which the kingdom does not recognise, is also striking. For instance, Mike Evans, founder of the Jerusalem Prayer Team, describes himself on his website as “a devout American-Christian Zionist leader”.

Shared interests

Saudi Arabia has maintained for years that normalising relations with Israel hinges on its withdrawal from Arab lands captured in the 1967 Middle East war – territory Palestinians seek for a future state.

But increased tension between Tehran and Riyadh has fuelled speculation that shared interests may push Saudi Arabia and Israel to work together against what they regard as a common Iranian threat.

Bin Salman, who in recent years has loosened strict social rules and arrested Saudi clerics deemed “extremists”, said in April that Israelis are entitled to live peacefully on their own land. A month earlier, Saudi Arabia opened its air space for the first time to a commercial flight to Israel.

Several members of the delegation, which met with Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed in the United Arab Emirates earlier in the week, have also advised US President Donald Trump on faith issues.

SOURCE:
Reuters news agency

Image: LightRocket via Getty Images

Flickr found new ownership under Smugmug earlier this year, and inevitably, that comes with changes.

The image hosting service has made a big one: Free accounts will be limited to 1,000 photos from Jan. 8, 2019, a significant cut from the terabyte of storage that was previously offered to users.

If you’ve reached 1,000 photos, you won’t be able to upload any more. If you’re already over the limit, then Flickr will delete your files until you’ve reached the limit, starting with the oldest one. For those who want to keep their photos, a Pro account costs $50 a year. 

Flickr has some seemingly honest reasons for the downsize, pointing squarely at the company’s Yahoo/Oath ownership.

In a blog post, it said the large amount of storage offered at the time was a mistake, with users attracted to the swathes of free space to dump their images.

“In 2013, Yahoo lost sight of what makes Flickr truly special and responded to a changing landscape in online photo sharing by giving every Flickr user a staggering terabyte of free storage,” the post read. 

“This, and numerous related changes to the Flickr product during that time, had strongly negative consequences.”

The company said that the terabyte offering “caused a significant tonal shift in our platform,” turning the platform away from community interaction. 

Flickr also stated that giving away the product for free would result in advertisers’ interests being prioritised, making the user the product. That, and it claims giving away free space sends a signal users that storage is not worth paying for. 

The company said 97 percent of free users have 1,000 photos or fewer, so if you’re one of the minority, it’s probably time to start backing them up. In other news for Flickr users, you won’t need a Yahoo account to login to the service from January next year.

Is it really a walkout if you barely… walk out?

Google offices around the world protested sexual harassment and workplace discrimination at the company on Thursday. But in Los Angeles — a center of the #MeToo movement, thanks to Hollywood — Googlers staged a more staid, internal affair than the rabble-rousing actions of their co-workers worldwide. 

The protests came in the wake of the New York Times report of Android creator Andy Rubin’s 2014 departure from the company due to a hushed up sexual harassment allegation — and his $90 million exit package. 

Rumblings of a walkout first began on Monday, October 29. The mostly New York-based organizers announced the walkout in an editorial for New York Magazine, in which they stated their demands.

In New York, thousands of protesters filled a park by the Hudson river, where what Gizmodo described as an “impassioned crowd” chanted and yelled their demands for change. Employees in Dublin San Francisco, and Silicon Valley flooded the streets with public displays of thousands. 

At the Google offices globally, the message was loud and clear: Googlers are mad as hell, and they’re not gonna take it anymore. 

But in Los Angeles, the message was more restrained, and the walkout consisted of a 50-foot collective crossing of the street, from one enclosed Google courtyard to another.

At 11:10 am, the appointed time for the protest in every timezone, the doorway below the Frank Gehry binoculars of the Google Santa Monica office was empty. What could have been a public, dramatic show of the need for change — below an iconic landmark! — never happened.

Instead of walking out into the streets, employees gathered in an internal courtyard, separated from the press and onlookers by a metal fence and the hammocks and playthings of the Google office.

A crowd of a few hundred gathered in the courtyard. An organizer spoke about why they were there. She invited employees to come up and share their own stories. But from the looks of it, no one answered her call.

After a 30 second chant of “no justice, no peace,” an organizer asked, “are you ready to walk?!” To which people cheered.

Then a stream of hundreds of employees walked out of Google… quietly crossing the street via a crosswalk to another enclosed, apparently Google-owned compound. 

In the new gathering space, employees chanted “Time is up.” Finally, once again supervised by Google security guards, they crossed the street back into their offices. 

The LA office protest was organized and polite, not impassioned. But credit where credit is due: any sort of protest to make change on behalf of women and equality is bold, and admirable. 

Additionally, perhaps the LA Google protesters were intimidated by the high expectations, and by the press; media propped cameras and microphones over the fence, and a news helicopter circled above the orange tree-filled Google courtyard, drowning out the mini-megaphone the organizer used to demand change. Plus, the Google Los Angeles office is much smaller than its New York and Bay Area counterparts; these employees did join with their coworkers worldwide, leaving their posts to demand change. 

And as a whole, the Google walkouts represent a potential sea change at Google, and CEO Sundar Pichai is clearly listening. 

It’s possible that some Googlers view this as an internal affair, not for view by the public. 

But that’s not what a walk out — something that is inherently public — is. 

Image: rachel kraus/mashable

The actions of the Google employees in Los Angeles represent a certain hesitance for unrestrained criticism within the tech world. That may be due to the strong company culture that has been deftly critiqued in the press and even by shows like Silicon Valley. 

One man, who was one of very few protesters who was willing to comment, replied to a reporter’s question about why he was protesting, with the answer “because we’re family.” That’s a nice sentiment, even if it’s not actually true; Google, and other tech companies, are multi-million-dollar corporations that, oh, pay their sexually abusing executives to go quietly with a golden parachute.

That reality hasn’t seemed to catch on entirely at Google, yet. 

The restrained LA protest shows that company loyalty, and the impulse to close ranks, remains at Google — even if other protests may indicate otherwise.

Because it’s so damn hilarious every year, Jimmy Kimmel got parents to tell their kids they ate their Halloween candy again. More than 1000 videos were submitted to the show this time around.

While there are plenty of tantrums, there are also adorable kids who refuse to get angry at their parents and by gosh it’s so sweet.

“Candy is not that special,” one kid tells their mother. Then there’s the kid who knows the classic segment all too well, which is now in its eighth, delightfully devilish year.

Image: mashable/johnny lieu

On blisteringly hot day in Sydney, Australia, Google employees joined their global counterparts in one of the final legs of a walkout against sexual harassment.

Around 200 employees met in a park beside the tech giant’s offices in the suburb of Pyrmont at 11:00 a.m. on Friday, where they listened to Googlers share anonymous stories from colleagues who had experienced misconduct at work.

People held signs saying “Don’t be evil,” a redux of Google’s mantra, “I walked out,” and “Execs will be held accountable for their actions.”

While there wasn’t the chanting that was present in San Francisco’s walkout, there was still anger at the company’s handling of harassers, not just at the top end of the company, but also present in the culture of the Sydney office.

“This is not a problem that only occurs for people interacting with a few executives on the other side of the world,” a Google employee said in a speech.

“As much as we would like to believe otherwise, this is a terrible part of our culture, a part that is present here in the Sydney office, and part of the broader Sydney tech community. This is a part of our culture that we need to change.”

Another employee, who had been part of Google for 13 years, said she’d “never thought she’d be on strike,” and especially because of a payout to harassers.

“I am fucking furious. I am really angry, because this is my home. I have been here and I have grown here,” she said.

“I am trans. I transitioned at Google. I have been a male manager of largely female employees, I’ve been a female manager of male employees. I know how complicated this gets. What we just saw, is not complicated.”

Google employees in Sydney shared the same demands made by their U.S. counterparts in a statement published on The Cut, asking for an “end to the sexual harassment, discrimination, and the systemic racism that fuel this destructive culture.”

As the walkout ended, Google executives were left with a final message: “We will judge you by your actions, not your words.”

San Salvador Island, Philippines – It is 6:30am on a Sunday morning and Rony Drio, 51, is on his way out into the water. 

He tosses his net and snorkelling gear into his small wooden boat, an outrigger canoe called a “bangka”.

Drio will spend the day in the shallow waters off his island home of San Salvador searching for aquarium fish that he can net, bag, and sell to local dealers for around 20 pesos, about 37 cents a piece. 

If he’s lucky, he’ll catch a hundred fish by the end of the week, netting him roughly 2,000 pesos ($37).

“If you have kids you need to send to school …and you’re trying to feed them,” said Drio, “it’s absolutely not enough.” 

Not enough for school uniforms, or to buy meat at the market in the nearby town, or for medication.

Aquarium fishing has long been supplemental income for the fishermen and women of San Salvador, an island community in Masinloc Bay in the northern Philippine province of Zambales. 

Recently, however, Drio has found himself scouring the nearby reefs any chance he gets.

Scarborough is ours. But if it came down to a fight, it’s like we’d be fighting with slingshots and they’d have the guns. We have no chance against China.

Rony Drio, fisherman

There was a time a fisherman like Drio could make as much as 7,000 to 9,000 pesos ($130 to $165) in a week, deep-sea fishing in the rich waters around Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.

But for the past six years, only the truly brave – or truly desperate – among Masinloc’s fishermen have ventured into their ancestral fishing grounds around the shoal.

In April 2012, Scarborough Shoal became a regional flashpoint when China established a naval blockade around the islet.

For Drio, a deep-sea fisherman of 30 years, it was the beginning of the end for his community’s way of life.

The Chinese incursion became the impetus for a landmark international legal case over maritime rights and an implicit rebuke of China’s colonial ambitions. 

But now, a new oil-and-gas deal between China and the Philippines is set to make Chinese control over the Philippine maritime territory essentially permanent.

The deal will reportedly give China exclusive rights for exploration in the South China Sea, essentially undermining the international ruling and making fishing communities like Drio’s a thing of the past.

China has long argued that it has historical claims to more than 90 percent of the South China Sea. The region is home to 10 percent of the world’s fisheries, and 30 percent of global shipping trade passes through it.

But perhaps the region’s greatest prize lies under the seabed itself: An estimated 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

In 2016, four years after the Chinese Coast Guard first appeared at Scarborough, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague ruled in favor of the Philippines, saying that China had violated the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS).

According to UNCLOS, a country’s maritime claim is determined by its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which extends 200 nautical miles beyond its shores. Scarborough Shoal, which is 129 nautical miles from Masinloc, falls well within the Philippine EEZ.

But by the time the PCA ruling was released, China had a new ally in the recently elected President Rodrigo Duterte, whose administration has sought to build friendlier ties with Beijing.

Earlier this week, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spent two days in Davao City – the hometown of his “most respected friend” President Duterte – to meet with Filipino Foreign Minister Teodoro Locsin Jr and discuss further steps in the two nations’ joint venture to explore the disputed waters.

This joint development agreement for oil and gas extraction might allow both countries to benefit economically from resources in the South China Sea, but any such agreement would put the Philippines at a major disadvantage.

Closer ties

According to Constantinos Yiallourides, an energy expert with the British Institute of International and Comparative Law who specialises in maritime rights, an oil and gas deal could, in practice, undermine the 2016 PCA ruling.

“It would be inconceivable for China to agree to remove its military from the islands,” said Yiallourides. 

In March 2017, Sansha Communist Party Secretary Xiao Jie, the administrator in charge of China’s control over the islands in the South China Sea, announced plans to expand their presence.

Speaking with the state-backed Hainan Daily, he explained that environmental monitoring stations were being built on six islands in the maritime region, including Scarborough Shoal.

Later that week, Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang and President Duterte met to discuss broadening cooperation in the region.

According to Yuallourides, the upcoming joint development deal would implicitly establish that China’s claims in the region, no matter where the in the EEZ the drilling took place, seal the fate of communities like San Salvador.

Any deal could be challenged by the Supreme Court, but Attorney Anne Marie Corominas, who worked on the PCA case for the Philippine government, is not hopeful. 

“The Supreme Court is so stacked with [pro-China] appointees who are now in power,” she said. “And they are aligned.”

It’s nearing 8:00am and Rony Drio watches as his companions skim the nearby waters for aquarium fish. They’ve only managed to catch a few. 

They won’t be able to make ends meet without another trip to Scarborough soon, a prospect that worries Drio.

Following the PCA ruling in 2016, the Chinese Coast Guard reopened the waters around the shoal to Filipino fishermen, but did not withdraw. Instead, they began to find new ways to discourage Filipino fishermen from venturing into the waters.

First, their ships blocked off the entrance to the island’s C-shaped lagoon. Access to the lagoon allowed the fishermen to stay out on the water for several weeks at a time to catch as many fish as possible.

“It really seems like they’re guarding something there,” said Drio. “They only let two bangkas in at a time, and none of the bigger fishing boats. If we get too close they chase us down.”

Meanwhile, six years of environmentally ruinous poaching practices by Chinese fishermen, protected by the military presence, have depleted the reefs around the shoal. 

“We heard that they were looking for oil,” said Drio. “But all we’ve seen [the Chinese] do is tear up the reefs, taking the giant clams.”

Drio estimates that his hauls from the reef have been halved as a result. And that’s before the Chinese Coast Guard takes its cut.

In late 2017, reports began surfacing that the Chinese military was forcibly confiscating large portions Filipino fishermen’s hauls.

The Duterte government downplayed these encounters, saying that “barter” between the fishermen and the Chinese Coast Guard was common. 

Drio, however, says that the Chinese Coast Guard would act with impunity, confiscating as much as 3,000 pesos ($60) worth of fish and giving only a few small bottles of water, noodles, or rice in return.

“It honestly seems like the Chinese are trying to make it economically infeasible for these communities to fish there anymore,” said Corominas, the attorney who worked on the PCA case for the Philippine government. 

In early June of 2018, Filipino network GMA released a report featuring a mobile phone video, taken by the Filipino fishermen, showing a member of the Chinese Coast Guard boarding a Filipino fishing boat and taking a large portion of the catch. The public outcry was immediate.

Shortly after the report was released, three representatives from the fishing community, including Drio’s son, Jurry Drio, 27, were invited to Malacanang, the presidential palace, for a press conference.

Then-presidential spokesperson Harry L. Roque lobbed questions at the fishermen, asking them how their lives had improved thanks to the Duterte administration’s China-friendly policies. Only one of the fishermen spoke, largely falling into line with the administration’s narrative.

When a Filipino GMA reporter pressed further, Roque ended the press conference.

“I’m not going to let you make a documentary out of my press briefing,” Roque said. 

Back in San Salvador, Drio watched the televised event in shock. 

“I don’t know what more proof they need, we have the video,” said Drio. “We feel the government has abandoned us.”

‘Scarborough is ours’ 

In San Salvador, where work is seasonal, a handful of large hauls can support a family for the better part of a year. 

Without this income, they face crippling economic instability with dire consequences.

Maretes Egana is the head of security on San Salvador, registering visitors and liaising with local police. I

It’s a job she inherited from her husband who died last year of leptospirosis, an easily treatable bacterial infection. Egana’s husband, like most of the men on San Salvador, was a fisherman. When he fell ill money was tight, and the family could not afford the $20 worth of antibiotics he needed.

Now a single parent, she works whatever jobs she can to make ends meet and support her children. Sometimes that means washing clothes in nearby Masinloc, others times it’s joining Drio in the shallow waters netting aquarium fish.

“I keep thinking maybe I should leave, to find work somewhere else,” she says. “But I can’t leave [my children].”

For Drio, it isn’t the idea of leaving his children, but of keeping them with him in San Salvador that worries him.

“I don’t want this life for my children,” he said. “I feel guilty when I take my son to fish, but there’s nothing else here for us but that.”

For now, Drio and the other fishermen plan to try their luck at the shoal in January. “Scarborough is ours,” he said. “But if it came down to a fight, it’s like we’d be fighting with slingshots and they’d have the guns.

“We have no chance against China.”