I live in Tennessee. I pay sales tax on Amazon purchases.
What's the big deal with Amazon? The sales tax is nothing more than administrative and not onerous. They even get to earn interest on the money before they pay it. They SHOULD have been collecting it and passing it on. I'm willing to bet that they turn on the sales tax collection in Texas (anyone from Texas want to try to buy something to see?) and then settle with the state.
The letter of the law is on the states side here - not because of Woot but because of the distribution center.
Why even try to hide it as I said - the consumer is paying the sales tax.
Now if Amazon really wanted to get froggy they could go after their past customers for the back sales tax....
It's pretty clear on the web site that it's 5 cents per megabyte of overage. I'm still amazed there's not a better offering.
As to sprint - I have a sprint card too. It's on "holiday" right now but when active still has the 5gb cap as well as shoddy coverage compared to verizon. It is nice that they let you put it on holiday for a time though.
In self defense I added tethering to my iphone so I have a solution from each carrier.
Even so - just a moderate update to system software that happens in background can use 1/2 a gigabyte in a hurry. Do that on 5 connected machines and half the bandwidth is gone in an very short time.
If there's a mobile solution other than these 3 carriers I'm all ears.
Some people need cable for their internet connection. Some can't cut "basic cable" because they need it in order to have the internet. I lived at one place (I don't have a TV) where I had basic cable with no TV just so I could have high speed internet. To get the internet you had to have basic cable. Now, basic cable is nearly $50.00 a month near here --- NOT including internet or any "premium" content.
I don't think cable is going away because it's the infrastructure for the internet in many neighborhoods.
They actually benefit from the internet. If they didn't offer internet I know a lot more people would cut the cord.
Let's go to the source and see what is really being reported. There was no malware on the PLANE. It was on the ground - and even WITHOUT the malware this problem may not have been detected as it depended on mechanics to log the failures. The logging of the failures failed. Even so - it may not have prevented this accident. Bottom line: Pilot Error primary cause.
Secondary - failure of warning system to warn the pilot of the error.
This particular failure may have grounded the plane to fix the warning system. Or not.
I don't generally disagree with TechDirt positions but in this case I think you missed the boat.
Ap STORES (and the key word here is STORE) are great for developers the same way that supermarkets are great for eggs. CUSTOMERS have a centralized place to obtain goods - and don't have to go to Farm A to get eggs, Farm B to get Milk and Farm C to get meat.
Sure - a saavy shopper can go directly to the farm and save some money but the STORE is CONVENIENT. In that Ap Stores rule.
This feeds into how theaters get movies. This strategy might actually play into how smaller movie houses obtain their movies. You see, theaters bid for movies. They say how much they are willing to pay to show it.
Web based applications (aplets) lack local storage. While the UI might be getting more robust, you simply lack access to what is necessary for an "real" application. Information lookups from a centralized server are fine for web aps. Anything that requires any persistent local storage is not.
The focus on subscriber retention is not really misguided. This is a newspaper after all. While the business model has to change with the times there are still dollars to be made from advertisers. Advertisers pay based on the number of eyeballs that will see their ads. This is probably still the majority of the income for the paper.
When you purchase something "mail order" and the company doesn't have a "nexus" (location) in your state, the company doesn't collect the sales tax THAT YOU OWE. It's all about taxes as noted in the post. NC wants to send you a bill for the taxes you owe.
Normally a store collects the sales tax for you. You DO OWE IT even if not collected. This is a major flaw in peoples understanding.
If I drive across the border to a state with no sales tax and buy a couch - I owe the "use tax" in my home state. It's just that the other state doesn't collect it for me.
If people paid what they owed - and I'm not saying there is an easy mechanism to track this or even to pay it - then this would not be an issue. You don't have to disclose WHAT you bought - only that you bought something taxable.
Amazon could provide the data - without the actual purchase details - and NC could proceed that way.
As states feel the economic pinch - these loopholes are going to be closed.
As online shopping gains in percent of total sales - tax revenues will decrease as well causing mounting pressure to "tax the internet".
A strict reading of the TOS (below) shows that Firefox, IE, any browser, ANY RSS reader is in violation of their TOS! NO ONE can use the content or even paint their website in a brower! (Emphasis added)
* NYTimes.com Terms of Service, paragraph 2.2: “The Service and its Contents are protected by copyright pursuant to U.S. and international copyright laws. You may not modify, publish, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in Section 2.3 of these Terms of Service), create new works from, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content or the Service (including software) in whole or in part.”
* Boston.com Terms of Service, paragraph 2.2: “The Service and its Contents are protected by copyright pursuant to U.S.and international copyright laws. You may not modify, publish, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in Section 2.3 of this Agreement), create new works from, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content or the Service (including software) in whole or in part.”
Let's say the patent is valid and applies. Google said it was to be Open source and ROYALTY FREE. It didn't say anything about patents. So if Google pays MPEG-LA a license fee for their patents why could it not still be Open Source and Royalty free.
The BIG deal if you ask me - is that H.264 is HARDWARE decoded in many video cards. Meaning it's fast and not choppy. This new Google codec won't be.