The executives can be happy in their 1950's world of 3 channels..
Although the inevitable outcome does scare the hell out of me... thousands of CBS workers all losing their jobs, watching their pension funds being decimated by all the golden parachutes filling the skies over their heads..
... it has NOTHING to do with what a "patient" can afford; it has to do with what the patients "Insurance" can afford - so if the patients insurance can't afford it, then obviously the patient needs better insurance.
Health care hasn't given a rodent's hind quarters about patient affordability in years...
And don't forget - there is minimal short-term profit in a cure - but maximum long-term profit in treatments...
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"?