I know it is probably outside of the scope of this kind of oath, but I think there should be more work done to encourage publication of results that did NOT show what the researchers/scientists set out to. Negative results are being swept under the rug and ignored. This is a problem that really seems like it should be addressed.
Comcast actually WAS throttling Netflix. This was proven when people tested with direct connections to Netflix and saw issues, then used a VPN (still on top of their Comcast connection) to access Netflix, and saw no issues at all.
That is the clearest indication of direct interference with traffic as far as I am concerned. Remember, VPN traffic is encrypted, so Comcast can't tell what the termination point is.
Please show me where the site committed an actual crime. I can't seem to find that anywhere.
Yes, the author brought up Whack-a-mole and used the term correctly and in-context. You however, did not. Even after I pointed this out to you, you STILL do not seem to understand the context involved.
Maybe you should go back to Sparkle Lanes and see if its your turn to roll your rock down the lane. I am not sure you are ready for another reading comprehension lesson.
A good compromise might be to allow me to say that all mail is encrypted with my local key when I tell it to "archive" message.
This would cause issues with searching as some have mentioned, but as part of the compromise you might store a local cache of your archived messages for searching. Google USED to do desktop search as I remember.