Sorry, this is what the OP said. The statement is clear, 'we don't want to outright lie and say there's no competitive impact..so if we find an edge case where there might be we should acknowledge that in our statements'.
That's them being normal and human (for a cable co. anyway) rather than proclaiming something they would know isn't true...if they found something that invalidated their statements.
And while there might be some software that could tell them, the person writing this 'note' likely doesn't have any access to that is putting it here to handle cases that could possibly crop up.
there are LOTS of things to be upset about, but this is missing the forest for the trees.
The benevolence of the State isn't direct subsidy but the franchise agreement that someone will always be available to serve your needs no matter where in town you are.
If private enterprise were allowed, the 'sticks' still wouldn't have cable or in some cases running water. It's simply not profitable to serve those customers unless you have the full customer base to make up for it. Society is better off when everybody gets a fair shake, even at the expense of slightly higher pricing for the easily served.
Now, franchise agreements have their problems to be sure, but without acknowledging the benefits of a faster build out of infrastructure it's not a fair comparion.
Is Taxi service infrastructure? Certainly not in the traditional sense, but its the same with Fedex/UPS. There are places they simply don't serve...yet the USPS is required to do so.
Do we cast off the 'hard to serve' in the name of cheaper pricing for the masses?
News outlets today would be better described as 'Podiums where politicians are allowed to speak without fear of cross examination'.
From national to local, 'reporters' don't question their subjects on anything they say. And while it's sometimes reasonable to allow someone to hang themselves with their own words, blatant falsehoods and dis-proven 'reasons' need to be called out publicly or the echo chambers become the truth people believe.
it like a digital fingerprint that identifies it to you sitting behind the computer or something at that time. ... In that way I can make a digital qualification that that’s the person that I’m talking to. If I had one choice, that’s what I would ask for.
Indeed, a man can dream for that. Because what criminal wouldn't LOVE to be able to know with confidence that the 12 year old he's talking to online is actually Sgt. Smith.
Most cashiers will happily use their code for your purchases. They get the 'points', you get the discount and the tracking company gets fairly confused.
Or just enter Jenny's phone number. (xxx)-867-5309 If it isn't registered in every area code already I'd be very surprised.
In my case, I had it tied to my phone number, then didn't use them for 3-4 years. Viola, my number has been reassigned to someone else so I just enter what used to be my phone number and give whoever has it the 'points'.
I'm assuming asking her husband "Honey, why did I get fined $800 dollars for our computer?"
wasn't an action she considered ? Seriously if I got fined 800 for something about my computer, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that if I make no changes or don't verify that changes were made to rectify the problem...it would likely happen again.
Yes she doesn't understand the technology, but clearly the husband did and she was fully able to ask him about the issue.