About this app
About Pyramid Linx
Speaking on behalf of the government, Van Bruggen said: “Meta, especially as one of the parties, but also Google, is really open to this conversation.”
She said the government would receive a report every six months on illegal gambling advertising across these platforms. She insisted the issue should also be dealt with at an EU level, through the Digital Services Act.
Candidates from the VVD party urged the government to take a “harder stance” against these big tech platforms.
About Pyramid Linx
These six additions sit on top of the effects that have been running since opening day on Aug. 28, 2025: tornado winds, swirling debris, fog, haptic seats, fire bursts, falling apples, and the flying monkeys version 1.0.
This is the marquee upgrade. In 2025, it was enough for physical monkeys to appear to fly off the screen and over your head. But more than 3.6 million people have already seen that stupid pet trick. The first-gen monkeys were 16-foot helium inflatables steered by drone operators. Their only motion, besides drifting forward, was wing-flapping. They floated more than they performed.
The new monkeys are animatronic. As shown in the video, they’re capable of moving their faces and bodies in menacing ways as they pass overhead during the witch’s attack. They also seem to be hanging from an overhead line, though the Sphere has not officially described the new flight system.
What is Pyramid Linx?
However, before he could even board the first cruise, Grant was told that he would not be able to proceed onboard. Grant had his son and partner along with him. The company only then went to inform Grant that he had been placed on a “no sail” list, effectively a ban, because of “breaking the house rules” in the casino.
Royal Caribbean informed Grant that he had broken various casino rules. While Grant filed a legal action against Royal Caribbean with the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, he has enjoyed qualified success so far.
Grant is suing the company to reimburse him for the AUD 22,000 he is owed. However, his case was at first shot down. Grant, however, appealed the decision and saw the court agree that it qualified as a consumer-trader dispute.
