Why not block what students have to say, I mean after all they are only kids and their opinions don't matter at all. I mean we spent a good portion of their youth telling them that their opinions on various subjects don't matter, then magically one day when they graduate they are expected to have a feeling and voice opinions, and even vote..talk about mixed signals.
From what I've seen all this rippol does is provide a way to post to twitter, facebook and other social networking sites about what your watching, if Hulu was wise they would already have this functionality added to their website making this other services redundant.
Interesting that you bring up Clinton. Most of the people I know who got upset over that whole ordeal were angry about the way he handled the issue, dodging questions and splitting hairs and generally being deceptive and insincere. WHAT he did meant a whole lot less than how he handled it, and the latter DOES say a lot about his character and what we can expect to see in foreign and domestic dealings. I expect the same reaction to Social-Networking-Generation candidates who try to scrub their past: better to be upfront about where you've been than to be caught being dishonest.
You may be right about folks being upset with the way it was handled. But I don't believe the act of cheating says he'll be a bad leader. However you have a point in saying that the act of being dishonest does.
Either way people should be more honest and hopefully we are headed toward a more honest society.
I think this could be a good thing. Maybe this will shut down those politicians who seek to try an hide their pasts and paint pretty pictures.
Government has for far too long tried to keep our politicians on some pedestal. Just like when everyone freaked out over Clinton getting a blow job. Get over it all ready, it was between him and his wife, and really doesn't reflect his political views.
Bring our countries leaders down to our level and I bet in the end it has a more positive outcome than a negative one.
The "legitimate reasons" thing is the standard worn excuse used by torrent people (there are ligit reasons to use P2P) and music downloaders (we are just testings, it's our backup, the dog ate my original copy). In the end, it's a slack response to an obviously attempt to get something for nothing.
There are in fact legitimate reasons to torrent. I torrent My Operating System Whenever there is a new release. And Where do I get the link for the torrent you might ask, why directly from the Operating systems websites.Almost Every single legitimate Linux Operating System releases torrents of their ISO's when when they release their OS, and hold breath this might come as a shock, it's COMPLETELY LEGAL.
So I wouldn't say it's a slack response to anything there are many legitimate reasons to use torrents and their may well be many legitimate reasons to mod a cable modem
The Problem is that on the Internet I have my choice of where my news comes from. I stopped watching local news, and even looking at the paper when I found that I so many more choices of where to get my information from.
All my news is put into one place google reader, where I can sift through headlines of on topics which interest me, if I see an article worth reading I will click the read more link because I prefer to read the article on the website which the article came from
The choice presented to the consumer makes it harder for the business, but is this actually a bad thing?
I just checked out the myspace page, I have heard that song before good tune, I noticed it's not available for download. I would love to give my money directly to my favorite artists, but until the big money is gone this just isn't gonna happen....