No cable service where I live (in spite of it being available in my area...) so I got a dish when I bought the place. Well, now that I have 20MB bonded DSL (with the "no home phone" option!) I am dropping the dish as well.
Let's do the math... my bill goes from $180/month to NetFlix + Amazon + Roku... seems to be a savings of about $150/month to me. I even bought one of the roku TVs for the bedroom. As the equipment becomes more prevalent in the market (hello Nvidia Shield!) the industry is going to find that the drop is not a gentle downhill slide - more like a cliff dive.
Proud to be both a Cord Cutter and a Dish Dropper! Let's see you track those stats!
No Sir, we no longer use encryption, so you don't need a backdoor.
We just use obfuscation in the form of a mathematical formula applied to the data to enhance its opaque characteristics during traversal of the internet backbone and last-mile carrier routes for the safety of our users binary encoded traffic.
So then the TSA is the ONLY entity that can't open the locks..
IIRC, they have destroyed luggage that was equipped with their special back-door key enabled locks because...why again? Using their special key is too hard for them? They lost it and couldn't find another one? They couldn't be bothered to train their agents to recognize and use them?
So what's the total expenditure from manufacturers and customers on this gold-plated cow patty?
Let's say you just happen to "know" the URL of bbc.com/news or some other news website, and you go there and read an article directly. Since the articles are not what is removed, they are still available.
I didn't use google - so I don't know the story was the subject of a "right to be stupid" link removal; am I now guilty of having that dreaded "forbidden knowledge" ???
Have I broken the CFAA by typing in a real URL instead of using search? After all, if you type "1234" at the end of an url that was "....?account=1233", that is hacking and gets you a nice prison term.
So how much of an URL can I type without violating CFAA? Can I read an article that I don't know has been "delinked"?
Law enforcement agencies from around the US are reporting record levels of income from their newest revenue source. Since they were unable to gain any traction with their "Respect us DAMMIT" campaign, they implemented the Spanish "lack of respect" fine structure, and have been proud to report that its revenues have surpassed even those of red-light camera systems.
Instead of whining that they can find no evidence of wrong-doing by the agencies they are supposed to oversee, they can turn that around and state that they can find no evidence of the agencies working within their mandates, and therefore should be de-funded and shut-down immediately.
They give us no evidence to the contrary, we must assume that they are violating every rule, and so far, that is what all the evidence that eventually comes out shows.
If the agencies can't PROVE that they are working within the rules - bye bye.