I actually went down this mental route but I came up with ...a paper trail and some 22 year old FBI agent will turn over all the documented evidence of wide spread surveillence on innocent civilians over to Wiki...er, Open...er,
...and, well, we just can't have that, now can we?
A. Pole-dancing despot who's proud of it and yells it out as much as he can while wearing red satin.
B. Simpering little despot who runs around and says "trust me, *I* understand the situation that you, obviously, do not" whilst lighting the bill of rights on fire.
First, the US can't figure out how to "stop" WikiLeaks so they're hoping that the Russians can get around US law and the technical properties that are the internet to "stop" it?
And after saying that, they're worried about the WikiLeaks documents? Really? So they're upset that someone might think that a diplomat is making sure he knows how many kids his counterpart has but they're perfectly ok with everyone knowing they hope the Russians will "stop" WikiLeaks and its founder?
I actually started reading Pravda on a daily basis last week. I just got completely fed up with the daily smack in the face of the complete lack of credibility and sheer incompetence of the US media machine so I figured it was either Pravda or The National Enquirer (the order vrs chaos is how Pravda won out - though the NATO and its 80 prositutes and "C.I.A - Cocaine Import Agency" helped).
All of you out there mocking on the Russians - yeah, at this point, they actually have more credibility than any main media outlet in the US. (Even if they do tend to end paragraphs with veiled questions.)
Especially considering the breaking news (dare I say, "hot news") of the FTC's Do Not Track which just proves that every single person in our govement and media are complete idiots.
I actually noticed this. More because my local news station makes Jerry Springer look like a nun. They jump on anything. But not this. It recieved a brief mention and only by their cub reporter and even he was rather rude about any criticism of the TSA.
...all I could think was, "Apparently, there's a golf game this afternoon with the channel owner and representative whatshisname.... ." How sad is that?
Here's the problem with the whole metered usage. My cell phone provider provides pretty extensive usage stats for me. It did not take long to figure out that I didn't need the pimp-daddy plan at all. Thanks, Mobile-Phone-Provider for saving me $75 a month! (And I'm going to bet that there's a lot of folks like me.)
And considering that I have a separate satellite and broadband companies - both of which have tv and internet services, hey, have at it. One will lose my business. The other may potentially gain my business. And I have a growing stack of books to read (paper...don't have to download them, thankyouverymuch)...
Play your games with each other because you know what? I'm perfectly comfortable sitting home at night with NO TV or computer turned on.
Even if it is true, their own logic still screws them...
Here's the problem with their logic -
if they are actually right and people are turning off cable because they can't pay for it, they are going to find a substitute...that is cheaper and better...which means when the economy picks back up, no one is coming back.
So they had better hope their logic is just as wrong as the cable-cutter theory or they are still screwed.
I know I am about to get CAPPED AT but I think you are missing the point?
Writing updates that in any way shape or form destroy your customer's data is not a winning business strategy. Should he back up his data? Yes. Should it be B&N's problem that he did not back up his data? No. Should B&N be putting out software that has the apparently anticipated effect of destroying someone's data. No. Do I have to spend money at B&N? No. And why would I when this is their product? And why would I waste my money on any other product in their stores if they can't be bothered with this franchise product they've been crowing about for how long?
Has there been another time in history when there is a real possibility that the powers-that-be could actually be overthrown relatively easily?
Is the problem that the governments and moguls do not understand that while the world appears to still be spinning around the who-has-the-most-money game, the reality of the masses rising up is practical and has nothing to do with money (for the most part)?
Not taking it to the WarGames level but considering:
1. The historical revolutions - taking out a government (even a section of one)
2. Today - actually taking down a government agency
It is both inspiring and horrifying at the same time.