This is An Ode to…, a weekly column where we share the stuff we’re really into in hopes that you’ll be really into it, too.

If you love urban legends and creepy internet creatures, look no further than The SCP Foundation, a website dedicated to collecting information on supernatural creatures, events, and objects.

The site, which launched in 2008, is set up like a top-secret government database, requiring navigation through several pages in order to find specific entries. It’s accumulated more than 4,000 unique supernatural files, and what’s really cool is that all of the entries come from fans. 

That’s right: Any and all entries come from the minds of creative contributors and shouldn’t be taken at face value.

Here’s how it works: Users on the site write up their monster or object by describing its appearance, abilities, and other relevant details. Users then submit their creature to administrators on the site who review the monster and make changes if necessary. Afterward, the user’s monster is converted into SCP style, which is reminiscent of a top-secret data file. 

An SCP-approved entity or object is then assigned a case number, which is usually labeled as SCP-#####. The entry gets its own slot, where it can be rated by other members, among the thousands of other files on the site. 

Before the SCP Foundation, there wasn’t really a single site dedicated to collecting and archiving this kind of information — most of it remained in obscure forums and threads on 4chan and Reddit. However, once the SCP Foundation came about, creepypastas and internet urban legends found a permanent home where they would be memorialized forever.

Some entries seem to come from monsters that have already existed on the internet. Take SCP-582, which is strongly based off the very popular Slender Man creature that came from 4chan in the early 2010s. However, entities like SCP-173, a terrifying creature of unknown origin made entirely of concrete that kills anything that comes in contact with it, are entirely original. 

To add a layer of authenticity, the entries are written out like a case file that contains observation notes, a threat meter, and sometimes experimentation notes. There’s a YouTube channel called The Exploring Series that thoroughly examines SCP entries in-depth, all while helping break down some of the sci-fi jargon that may be in a entry file. 

The SCP Foundation and is still accepting submissions to fill their fifth set of entries, which will include files for entries 4000-4999. If you want to flex your creative muscle, take a look at the site, and see if you can come up with a horrific entity or object that will keep readers up for nights.

Libyan authorities have used rubber bullets and tear gas to forcibly disembark more than 90 refugees and migrants who had refused to leave a cargo ship docked in the port of Misrata.

The Panama-flagged ship rescued them off the Libyan coast 10 days ago, as their boat began sinking, and brought them to Misrata. Once there, 14 disembarked willingly but, in the first documented case of its kind, the other 92 refused to leave.

“A joint force raided the cargo ship and used rubber bullets and tear gas to force [them off the ship],” the commander of the central region coastguards, Tawfiq Esskair, told the Reuters news agency by phone on Tuesday.

Some of those on board were wounded during disembarkation but were now “in good condition” after treatment in hospital, and all had been taken to a detention centre in the city, said Esskair.

During the 10-day standoff, the migrants pleaded to be taken to Europe, saying they are prepared to die than be returned to detention in the North African country.

Two of those on board – Kai, 18, and Daniel, 16, both from South Sudan – told Al Jazeera earlier this week that it was too dangerous to go back to the centres, where they risk being abused and sold to people smugglers while having little hope of being evacuated. 

The group was brought to Misrata on November 10, four days after setting sail in a rubber boat with the hope of reaching Italy.

Daniel said that the rubber boat had travelled almost 200km before the Panamanian-flagged cargo ship, The Nivin, crossed its path.

Both Daniel and Kai said the crew on board The Nivin told them they would be taken to Italy, but instead brought them to Misrata.

While many on board said they survived torture by human traffickers in Libya, others had stories about serious abuses in official detention centres.

Al Jazeera has previously heard reports of deaths in detention centres run by the Libyan Department for Combatting Illegal Migration (DCIM) which has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Libya’s western coast has been a main departure point for refugees and migrants fleeing wars and poverty and hoping for new lives in Europe.

But since last year, heavy pressure from Italy – which had been bearing the brunt of arrivals – resulted in the disruption of coastal smuggling networks and the withdrawal of charity rescue ships.

SOURCE:
Al Jazeera and news agencies

Earlier this month, Earl Sweatshirt dropped back into view — after a clever fake-out on Vince Staples’ FM! — with the lucid, multicolored “Nowhere2go.” We now know, thanks to a new Instagram post, that it was the proper beginning of a new era: Earl’s new album, Some Rap Songs, is due out November 30.

To continue the celebration, he’s dropped a tape machine-hissing word avalanche called “The Mint” with some help from New York rapper Navy Blue. Like “Nowhere2go,” “The Mint” sounds liberatingly unfettered, more proof from Earl about what he’s been thinking about during his time away.

“Lotta blood to let, peace to make, give a fuck about a check,” Earl raps to wind down the creaky, piano-led track. He’s bloodletting here, sure, but he’s also backtracking and giving a little clarity about the past two years of his life, a time he said he spent depressed on “Nowhere2go.” “Two years I’ve been missing, living life / You was wilding, every day was trash,” he says.

Earl also unveiled the blurry cover art for Some Rap Songs and made the album available for pre-order at his website. You can check out the artwork below, then listen to the song above.

Several Championship clubs are “gravely concerned” by the EFL board’s announcement it has approved a new domestic broadcasting rights deal.

Club officials met on Tuesday to discuss the £595m five-year agreement that has been signed with Sky Sports.

They say the deal has been done without them being fully consulted.

“Nineteen clubs from the league wrote to the EFL asking them not to sign the deal and to engage in meaningful discussions,” said a statement.

The statement, from “several unnamed clubs”, said they felt they had been “ignored”.

“Championship clubs are gravely concerned that the EFL board has announced it has approved a new long-term domestic broadcasting rights deal,” it said.

“Our issues are not with Sky, who we respect and value, but with the way in which the proposed agreement has been negotiated and explained to clubs.

“We remain convinced that any solution to the broadcasting of EFL competitions can only be on the basis of protecting attendances and securing the financial position of all our 72 clubs.

“There is a calm determination within Championship clubs to ensure the matter is not left here.”

The deal, which runs from the start of next season until May 2024, represents a 35% increase on the previous contract.

‘The deal allows our clubs the benefit of financial security’ – the EFL view

Before the clubs’ statement, EFL interim chair Debbie Jevans had said she would review how the league discusses future deals.

“Concluding these negotiations has indeed been challenging, as is the case when managing a diverse group of stakeholders, and the board took on board the comments and frustrations voiced by a number of clubs and has committed to reviewing the way the league engages with its clubs to ensure that we move forward in a collaborative way in the future,” she said.

It is understood Derby County, Leeds United and Aston Villa are among the clubs opposed to the new contract.

“The deal we have entered into with Sky, after fully testing the current market through our external advisors, allows our clubs the benefit of financial security which was an absolute priority for us throughout this process,” said EFL chief executive Shaun Harvey.

“It is a partnership that, as well as having the necessary financial benefits, provides the EFL with the platform to maximise reach and exposure for its competitions, alongside providing further opportunities for clubs to monetise some of those games not broadcast on television.”

SpaceX’s next and soon-to-be most powerful rocket officially has a new name. 

The private spaceflight company’s founder, Elon Musk, announced on Twitter late Monday night that SpaceX’s BFR — short for Big Falcon Rocket or Big F*cking Rocket, depending on who you ask — is now going to be known as SpaceX’s Starship. 

It’s an aspirational name for a rocket that hasn’t yet flown, but Musk has high hopes for the future booster and ship.

“Starship is the spaceship/upper stage & Super Heavy is the rocket booster needed to escape Earth’s deep gravity well (not needed for other planets or moons),” Musk said on Twitter.

The ship is expected to be about 387 feet, 118 meters long, with enough space for 100 people aboard.

At this point, only time and money will tell whether the Starship will be successful.

SpaceX isn’t yet receiving any government funding for the space system, and it’s unclear exactly what kind of market will exist for the huge rocket and ship in the future. 

It’s also important to note that SpaceX, as a company, has yet to fly any humans to any part of space at all, though that could change in the coming year if they start flying astronauts to the International Space Station as planned.

But the audacity of the plan is very on-brand for Musk and his space company.

Earlier this year, Musk announced that the Starship would bring Yusaku Maezawa, a Japanese billionaire entrepreneur, on a trip around the moon with a group of hand-picked artists in 2023. 

Until then, the company is pouring resources into getting the actual rocket built and flying.

One day, Musk hopes that the Starship will be used to bring people and supplies to Mars. 

He has big dreams of cities on the Red Planet decades from now, establishing humanity as a “two-planet species” capable of living through a cataclysmic event because we’re spread across the solar system.

According to Musk, Starship could be used for any number of journeys into the cosmos. The space system could be used to travel deep into the solar system in order to visit faraway moons and planets.

The Starship will be an “interplanetary transport system that’s capable of getting people anywhere in the solar system,” Musk said in September.

But for the time being, SpaceX will have to stick to its two smaller rockets — the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy — to break the bonds of Earth’s gravity.

“Oh what a tangled web we weave/when first we practice to deceive,” are lines often attributed to Shakespeare that were, in fact, written in 1808 by the great Scottish bard Sir Walter Scott. But how well they describe the tangled web Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (known as MBS) has woven and now caught himself in with the brutal murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2 this year.

On October 3 in a wide-ranging interview with Bloomberg, MBS was asked about the disappearance of Khashoggi. His reply became the first Saudi narrative: “My understanding is he entered (the consulate) and he got out after a few minutes or one hour.” 

Subsequently, Saudi authorities took the line that Jamal Khashoggi had disappeared. They had no idea where he was.

When Bloomberg asked MBS if he was still in the consulate, the crown prince answered, “He’s not inside.” That at any rate, as events were to show, was the truth.

The Saudi authorities clung to the narrative of not knowing where Khashoggi was while smearing him in the domestic press and having friendly journalists in the West attempt to do the same. But the Turkish authorities began a drip-drip campaign, based on surreptitious recordings and CCTV images they held that soon undermined this initial narrative.

So, the Saudis pursued another one: that Khashoggi had been accidentally killed after an argument and a fist fight broke out in the consulate. That, too, collapsed under the weight of the Turks’ relentlessly calculated release of information.

Then, a third line: Khashoggi had been strangled by a rogue agent and his body given to a mysterious Turkish collaborator to dispose of.

Next, came yet another narrative – the killing had been pre-meditated but that those responsible would be held accountable. And sure enough, 18 suspects were arrested. None of them was named.

Then, on November 15, the public prosecutor announced, again without supplying any names, that 11 were being charged and he was seeking the death penalty for five of the men held. The rogue narrative was resuscitated. But instead of Khashoggi being strangled, the claim was that he had been killed by a lethal dose of a sedative.

Within a few hours, the US Treasury Department released a list of 17 Saudi citizens facing sanctions under the Magnitsky Act. The list included Saud al-Qahtani, a senior adviser and very close confidante of MBS as well as Maher Mutreb, a senior security officer who was said to have led the attack on Khashoggi. Mutreb had frequently accompanied the crown prince on his foreign trips.

It was all of a set piece: the Saudis would punish those they claimed as perpetrators and the US would follow suit with sanctions, all while sticking to the line that MBS was not involved.

And to make sure the plan would run smooth, the White House also appointed a US ambassador to Riyadh after the post had been left vacant for almost two years.

But major cracks in the Trump-Saudi arrangement remain. For example, Saud al-Qahtani is not, it appears, one of those being pursued by the Saudi judicial system, yet he is on the Treasury Department list because he is considered to be one of the key plotters.

Ahmed al-Assiri, another very close confidante of MBS, is not on the Treasury list even though the Saudi public prosecutor has claimed that al-Assiri, without the knowledge of MBS, had approved a plan to bring Khashoggi to Riyadh by persuasion or force. So, one is on the US sanctions list and one is not, yet both are deeply implicated in the killing.

At the same time, the Turkish government is not showing any signs of backing off. Just a day after the Saudi public prosecution’s announcement, Turkish daily Hurriyet ran a column claiming that the authorities had a second tape of what went on in the Saudi consulate on October 2. 

Then, the same day, numerous US media outlets reported that the CIA has concluded that MBS personally ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. The president announced he was going to think about things while calling Saudi Arabia a “truly spectacular ally”.

All this effort has been put into pushing suspicion away from MBS because President Trump would really like to keep him in power. There are three reasons for this. 

The first is the so-called “deal of the century” cobbled together by his son-in-law Jared Kushner, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and MBS. The Saudis are seen as crucial to arm-twisting the Palestinians into accepting the deal. 

The second is the alliance against Iran. The president’s national security adviser, John Bolton, has long advocated for regime change there but the Americans don’t want to repeat the Iraq fiasco so they want regional players – that is the Israelis, the Saudis and the Emiratis – to provide the military muscle should Bolton’s dangerous fantasy threaten to become reality.

The third factor in Trump’s calculations is his desire to ensure that MBS manages oil prices so that the US economy doesn’t suffer negative consequences from the oil sanctions on Iran, as he begins his campaign for re-election.

There are, however, potentially lethal consequences for Trump’s political career if he insists on standing by the crown prince. The midterm elections swung control of Congress to the Democrats who would like nothing better than to hold the president’s feet to the fire over his handling of the Khashoggi killing. And as the impact of the midterm results begins to take hold – the Republicans lost key support in suburban America – the GOP may start to rethink whether Trump is indeed able to win the next presidential election.

Meanwhile, European pressure on Saudi Arabia is growing; Germany just announced it is halting all arms sales to the Saudi state and imposing an entry ban on 18 Saudi nationals suspected of being directly involved in the killing.

Still, what plays in MBS’s favour is the fact that any serious challengers, such as former Crown Prince and Interior Minister Mohammed Bin Nayef and the former head of the National Guard Miteb Bin Abdullah, have already been sidelined and others such as his uncle Ahmed Bin Abdulaziz are considered too weak and ineffectual to bring change within the House of Saud.

Nonetheless, the damage to MBS’ reputation is profound and largely irreparable. The Western media, foreign businesses and politicians will no longer be able to fete him as a great moderniser and visionary pulling his desert kingdom into the 21st century. Now, he will forever be seen for what he is: a reckless authoritarian thug who uses murder as a weapon to silence those who criticise him.

Were MBS able to rewind the clock, one wonders, would he repeat his blunder? Would he weave the same web? Unfortunately, the answer is yes, he probably would.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

British Olympic sprinter Nigel Levine has been banned from all sport for four years after failing a drugs test.

The European 4x400m relay gold medallist was provisionally suspended in December.

And UK Anti-Doping has now confirmed the 29-year-old tested positive for banned asthma drug clenbuterol following an out-of-competition test on 24 November 2017.

Levine was part of Britain’s 4x400m relay team at the 2016 Rio Olympics.

Clenbuterol is on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s prohibited list because it is deemed a performance-enhancing drug and can induce weight loss.

Levine, an indoor and outdoor European 4x400m relay champion, has not raced since he broke his pelvis in a motorbike crash in Spain in January 2017, an accident which also involved compatriot James Ellington.

Ukad chief executive Nicole Sapstead said: “All athletes must adhere to the principle of strict liability, and are solely responsible for any substances found in their system.

“Mr Levine is an elite athlete, who has competed at the Olympic Games, European and World Championships, and has received significant anti-doping education throughout his career.

“It is up to role models such as Mr Levine to uphold the highest standards when it comes to anti-doping, ensuring they check all supplements thoroughly and are 100% certain they know that what they are consuming is not prohibited.”

It’s been 54 years since Mary Poppins came into the world in movie form. And now, five decades on, we’re getting a second helping in the form of Mary Poppins Returns — a sequel to the beloved classic. 

Of course, we have many burning questions about this hotly anticipated film. But fear not: Mashable spoke to the film’s producer Marc Platt during a set visit to Shepperton Studios, near London. Here’s everything you need to know about the new Mary Poppins movie. 

Is Mary Poppins Returns based on a book? 

Marc Platt: We went right to the source. We went to P.L. Travers. And, it turns out that P.L. Travers wrote eight books, and the original film really capitalises on only one of the books. And what we found in her books was really a treasure trove of new characters and episodes. We realised that we could bring the sequel our own version and our own story. An original story of Mary Poppins all these years later in a very exciting way, but that we could draw upon the original source, P.L. Travers.

When is the sequel set? 

MP: She wrote her books in 1934 and 1935. Our film, Mary Poppins Returns, is set in those years, which is the Depression Era in England. So, it takes place about 25 years after the original film took place. We went after David Magee who was an Academy Award winning screenwriter — he also notably wrote Life of Pi, Finding Neverland —  to work with us on the screenplay. 

What is the plot? 

MP: Our story is, as I said, set in the 1930s. Michael Banks — the young boy from the original film — is now a father of a family and he’s living in Cherry Tree Lane in the house and he has children. There’s been a loss in the family, and so there’s a need for Mary Poppins to come back into their world and to the world of these new children, and to the world of Michael Banks and his sister Jane, to see if she can bring joy back into their lives. 

How did they decide who to cast as the new Mary Poppins? 

MP: When it came to casting, really, we could only think of one person to step into the shoes and to own the role of Mary Poppins and that was Emily Blunt, an actress who we’ve worked with on Into the Woods and most recently we did Girl on the Train with her. 

She’s not only a consummate actress, who possesses a tremendous craft as an actress, she sings beautifully. By the way, she dances magnificently, you’ll see in the film, which was a big surprise. But she’s also instantly authentic as the role of Mary Poppins. She’s very related to it, she grew up in this world. And she has a way, and has found a way, to make the character her own. It’s her own interpretation. She’s quite sublime in the role. Hopefully we’ll have a few moments to chat with her a bit later. 

Mary Poppins is 25 years older in the film. Why hasn’t she aged? 

MP: Mary’s a character who lives outside time. She’s magic. And so she is the one character who actually doesn’t age. So she is as ever as we know her and as she will be forever, that character.

What does Lin-Manuel Miranda’s character do? 

MP: Jack in our film is an adult protégé of the original character Burt. But he’s not a chimney sweep, he’s a leerie. Back in the day the leeries were those who rode around on bicycles with ladders and climbed up to the lamp posts and lit the street lamps on the streets of London, and then doused them in the morning when the dawn would rise.

To play that role we got the exciting performer, most notable from Hamilton, Lin-Manuel Miranda. Wonderful song and dance man, wonderful actor, which is what he’s doing in this film. And he inhabits the role of Jack and creates a wholly original character, playing this leerie. And he gets to do all the things that you want to see Lin do. He gets to be charismatic. He gets to bring light into the world. He sings. He dances. And, believe it or not, 1934 music hall style he even gets to do a little rap. It’s quite extraordinary.

Who else is in the film?

MP: Our other cast members include: Colin Firth, who plays the head of a bank, the antagonist in the piece. The brilliant Ben Whishaw — you might know him in James Bond movies — plays Michael Banks grown up. Brilliant actor, I might add. Emily Mortimer plays his sister. Meryl Streep joins us again and she plays a relative of Mary Poppins, a distant cousin. [She] kind of lives in an upside down world. 

And we also have an appearance by Angela Lansbury, who plays an original character from the P.L. Travers books, which we’re very excited about. 

Who is Dick Van Dyke playing?

MP: Also joining us for the film, from the original, is Dick Van Dyke, who plays a similar character to the original.  You know, he played two characters in the original film. He played Burt and he played the old banker, Mr. Dawes. 

Well, in this film he actually plays that old Mr. Dawes’s son, who now is the same age as Mr. Dawes. So he looks kind of the same as in the original film, he just doesn’t have to wear much make-up. But it was a quite an exciting moment for all of us when he did his couple days of shooting. His spirit, his generosity, his joie de vivre was just ever present, and so he created a wonderful role.

Mary Poppins Returns will hit cinemas in the UK on December 21, 2018, and in the U.S. on December 19, 2018.

England wing Chris Ashton has been ruled out of Saturday’s match with Australia, who have themselves been struck down by a stomach bug.

Ashton limped off during the first half of the 35-15 win against Japan with a calf injury that England say will keep him out for a couple of weeks.

Meanwhile, 10 members of Australia’s travelling party, a mix of players and staff, are suffering from illness.

Full-back Israel Folau and fly-half Bernard Foley have not trained.

Back-row forward David Pocock also has a neck problem.

“Israel Folau and Bernard Foley are still recovering from a stomach bug that cropped up at the end of last week,” said an Australia spokesman.

Lock Izack Rodda added: “I think there’s been a few players and a couple of staff unwell, but it’s been contained so it’s pretty good.”

Centre Manu Tuilagi is still being assessed by England after struggling with a lingering groin strain.

After a four-year absence, Ashton made his comeback to international rugby against South Africa at the start of the month, before a try-scoring return to the starting XV against New Zealand.

He will leave the England camp on Tuesday, meaning Jack Nowell and Jonny May are likely to start on the wings, with Joe Cokanasiga, who made his debut against Japan, also in contention.

England squad to face Australia:

Forwards: Charlie Ewels, Jamie George, Dylan Hartley, Alec Hepburn, Ted Hill, Nathan Hughes, Maro Itoje, Courtney Lawes, Ben Moon, Brad Shields, Kyle Sinckler, Elliott Stooke, Sam Underhill, Harry Williams, Mark Wilson.

Backs: Chris Ashton, Joe Cokanasiga, Elliot Daly, Owen Farrell, George Ford, Piers Francis, Jonny May, Jack Nowell, Henry Slade, Ben Te’o, Manu Tuilagi, Richard Wigglesworth, Ben Youngs.

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

This seems to be the guiding principle for Snap Inc.’s relentless pursuit to make its Spectacles camera glasses A Thing. Despite two versions of Spectacles, each of which got a lukewarm response, the company is reportedly planning to release a new $350 version by the end of this year with two cameras. The new specs will also capable of augmented reality when connected to the Snapchat app.

According to Cheddar, Spectacles 3 will have a frame made of aluminum. The two cameras will enable the wearable to be able to create “augmented reality effects in videos.” 

But don’t get too excited just yet. The new Spectacles themselves won’t be able to overlay augmented reality effects on top of what you see through the lenses in real time.

No, you’ll still need to use the Snapchat app to “overlay AR lenses and create 3D-like photo effects from footage taken by the Spectacles,” according to Snap insiders who spoke to Cheddar.

It sounds kinda half-assed in my opinion, but it’s apparently a stopgap release until Snap CEO Evan Spiegel figures out how to make smart eyewear with the AR tech built right in.

Cheddar also claims the company is lowering its internal expectations for the new Spectacles, with plans to only manufacture about 24,000 pairs, which is less than the estimated 35,000 Spectacles 2 and 52,000 more premium Spectacles 2 the company had produced.

As someone who reviewed the original pair and found them fun, but not sustainable for daily use (even for diehard Snapchat users), I’m super skeptical of the new one. 

$350 is pretty steep for a pair of sunglasses (with cameras or not) and Snapchat’s core audience — mostly teenagers — haven’t exactly taken to its cheapest $150 Spectacles 2. What makes Snapchat think this same cash-strapped demographic will spend more than double for what sounds like another novel gimmick?

Spiegel’s obsession with molding Snap, Inc. into a “camera company” might ultimately be its own undoing.

Perhaps Snap’s trying to cater to an older audience, but anyone watching the race between Snapchat and Instagram knows the latter has already left the other in its dust. Anecdotally, it feels like everyone’s mom and grandpa is on Instagram and they’re almost certainly not on Snapchat. That’s no surprise since it’s essentially Facebook in hipper clothes.

Spiegel’s obsession with molding Snap, Inc. into a “camera company” might ultimately be its own undoing. It’s quite possible he’s trying to get a leg up on tech companies like Facebook, which has repeatedly and openly said it is building augmented reality-equipped eyewear and plans to release them in the next few years.

Similarly, Apple has been rumored a great many times to be be secretly working on AR glasses as well.

Getting ahead of the pack would put Snap in an enviable position with a track record for creating computerized consumer eyewear. But alas, that’s not how hit products always work; being first doesn’t equate to success. Making the best product — one with clear and purposeful value for our connected lives — usually does and is worth the wait.

While Snapchat continues to lose users, it’s worth questioning where the company’s priorities are. Getting the much-anticipated Android app redesign should at the top of the list; Spectacles seem like a distraction at best right now.

I don’t know what Snap’s thinking with plans to sell yet another pair of Spectacles, but I hope they know something we don’t. Because it’d be sad to see Snap destroy itself over such seemingly novel camera glasses.