When that day comes, remember what you said here and be thankful you were wrong.
I agree wholeheartedly with your statement.
As much as I hate the system, which tends to require lawyers and lots of money for what justice you can afford, most of those I've actually dealt with have been decent, hardworking, and for the most part, interested in doing whatever necessary to help/protect the interests of their client.
There are lawyers like Carrion, Duffy, Steele, Hansmeier, Lipscome, Jack Thompson, etc., but those tend to be the vocal exception to the rule, and it seems like there are places within the law where the pricks and DB lawyers gravitate to, they tend to be highly visible and yet the minority when it comes to lawyers.
But if you watch an hour or two of television, then it starts seeming a lot more reasonable.
I don't mind spending $5/day on entertainment. I just don't thin that any amount of television is reasonable waste of $5/day. If I want mindless entertainment, I spend $20 on a video game, and I can play that game for weeks, whenever I want. Terraria was probably the single most reasonable use of $20 for entertainment in recent years, and the added advantage is that I can bring up my server and host a game for all my friends.
The problem for the cable industry, which has been said many times here already, is that there are so many options now-a-days for entertainment, that the heady days where they were the only game in town are long gone. Sticking their head in the ground, forcing their customers to change their habits instead of changing their own habits, will do nothing to stem the tide.
You and I are outliers though. The average American watches 5 hours / day, so that works out to about $1 / hour on the cable package you have. Considering how good television is these days, that's not a terrible price.
I am not an outlier (and from the looks of this article, I am not alone either in doing what I am doing)...I haven't removed all television from my life...I still have an antenna, and still (occasionally) watch TV (usually the news, or Big Bang, if I just happen to hit it on the night its playing.) Though I have mostly switched to streaming what I want to watch either directly from the provider's website (cbs.com for Big Bang, southpark.com for South Park) or via Netflix/Amazon/Hulu. But most of the time, its playing in the background, occasionally capturing my attention. And I am not paying $5 a day for it.
Same here, which is why I am not technically a cord-cutter. But I am a cord-cutter in the sense that I haven't even connected the cable TV box.
Cox said that they were cheaper when bundling the TV and the Internet bill together, and it seemed, looking at their glossy ads that it was cheaper (nevermind the fact that they really went out of their way to make it impossible for you to cut cable TV off the bill and keep internet,) when the bill actually arrived and I discovered that fees, taxes, tariffs, energy recovery, rentals, etc., increased the bill by ~$50, that it wasn't at all worth the $10 off for bundling cable and internet. My parents, who still have basic cable, spend ~$200 a month on their bill, a good percentage of it being fees and other costs. I spend $99 a month for my cable bill, and thanks to the Internet Tax Freedom Act, there are no taxes, tariffs, rentals, etc., on that bill (though that may be changing shortly.)
Either way though, $2 / hour sounds about right for me.
How many people watch cable 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? When I had cable, it was background noise, running three or four hours a week. $150/30 = $5 a day for background noise, which doesn't seem like a lot. However, when I left, cable had almost tripled in price between when I started and when I left, and they were talking about another increase in price. Lots of money being thrown away each month for background noise.
I spend ~$30 a month for background noise (Netflix/Amazon, and once-upon-a-time, I paid for Hulu, but then realized that I could just attach a computer to a TV and I could watch far more content on Hulu without paying for ads.) Far cheaper, and I don't feel bad when I don't use it.
You say Verizon can "grab information" out of an SSL connection
Never said that, nor did I imply it. Wow. You gotta love bashing down strawmen, you seem to be really good at it.
As for GRE tunnels, if you own the backbone, you can create tunnels and add whatever headers you want to the transmission. But you don't even need to do that...you can just send the information out-of-band.
They can't inject cookies in that, at least not yet.
They don't need to inject anything. They own the infrastructure. They can GRE tunnel the traffic to the endpoint and put the data into a header, so the GRE tunnel end-point/receiver can grab the information and display ads based on that information, while still allowing SSL traffic to flow without an issue. May require a little extra work, but may be worth the effort to keep the money rolling in. Of course, why even do that, since they already have a database showing your entry point, so they can just set up AOL's ad network to query the database and pull your information directly, maybe caching all the users coming from a particular IP address and some sort of mechanism in-between to make sure that each user is identified.
Should be pretty easy if they already own the end-point...
The trick is adding that capability to non-Verizon users.
Re: Re: So what's wrong with being tracked all over the net?
Tell you what. Why don't you create a blog or news site for us to go that reveals the evils of the tech world and Big Google? Then everyone that wants to can go over there and no body has to argue.
Yeah, but only if he also turns off commenting in order to protect our 1st Amendment rights. There is no way I can support a website that denies our freedom of speech by allowing us to comment on items that they post!
I'm used to it. With all the credit monitoring I'm getting, I believe I'm now set for life plus 70 years.
I know this is tongue firmly in cheek, but if you are relying on credit monitoring services to keep you secure, you've already lost.
Better is to remove credit from the equation. Get rid of the big four credit reputation companies and the problem disappears immediately (well, except for the IRS, which still allows scammers to submit fraudulent tax returns based solely on publically available information, and it is pretty safe to assume that your SSN and other vital information is publically available by now.) Makes buying things on credit harder, but how many times do people actually do that in their lives.
Credit freeze is really the best way of doing this, and so long as it is implemented correctly (which, considering Experian is one of the four, and they have seriously fucked up here, that is a shaky assumption,) it makes things far more difficult for the scammers/criminals to use your information to steal stuff.
Re: Re: ??? If you don't like this, then why the hell are you wanting to allow modifications to it?
I want my car to take input from my phone (hands-free calling and text message-reading) and from any USB device I plug in that contains music.
Off-topic, but Mason, have you ever considered a carpc?
Don't need anything integrated into the car bus network, just a simple carpc that runs Linux, has bluetooth and does everything you want. Car already supplies 12v DC on the accessory or radio power wire, and getting a 12v DC power supply is far cheaper than an DC/AC/DC converter.
Unfortunately, they aren't cheap, but they are getting far cheaper now that miniitx boards are getting cheaper and the components are getting more standardized (I still hate buying memory for them though...since it is always a crapshoot on how tall the memory will be to fit in one of these things. My first carpc was about $1000, but they are getting cheaper...only big issue now is the price of the DIN case, but you can always mount the computer under a chair or behind the control panel and leave the radio in the car if you want to still have access to that.
The schools reaction to it did however endanger the child.
The school's reaction to it did more to endanger the child's safety...it endangered the safety of us all. We need kids who think outside of the box, who explore new ideas and new concepts, that enjoy STEM and want to make the world a better place. Now the other children in the class have learned not to question authority, not do anything "out-of-the-ordinary," not show off their intelligence and ingenuity; take your Soma, do your job, keep your head down, and don't worry about your class and social status...
Re: Re: Re: Response to: Scott on Sep 14th, 2015 @ 12:31pm
You can copyright video.
That is exactly what I said.
I think the problem is, as you said, they can say anything they want, but they aren't necessarily right legally or factually. Until the law holds them accountable for their misrepresentations as to what the law actually says or what we can do legally, this shit will continue.
"Any rebroadcast, retransmission, or account of this game, without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, is prohibited."
They say it every time, and even though they have yet to win a case against a defendant for doing so, they still say it.
Sure, rebroadcasts or retransmissions of a fixed broadcast is illegal, but outlawing accounts which do not involve actual copying of video or audio by another company without their permission is bogus copyright advice from copyright maximalists who want to scare everyone into thinking they have to ask permission (and be denied) every time they want to talk about the game.
My wife's 2001 suv had to be taken into the shop just to do basic maintenance like brake work (most brake work will mean you need to bleed the brakes and a computer had to be connected to the car to do so). I'm tired of paying out the ass for simple fixes that I can do for a lot less and faster.
I suspect this is little more than a money grab by the dealers/car companies. I took one of my cars over to a repair shop for an issue I was having. My other car had the same issue at one point (which needed to be fixed for safety reasons,) and the mechanic was able to fix it in about 20 minutes and charged me about $100 for parts and labor. The other car required about 3 hours of work, and the mechanic said it would be around $500 for parts and labor. The only difference, the car company decided to put a computer into the mix, that required a special tool to work with, and failure to use that tool would result in a broken car. And the mechanic complained that the only reason for this was so that you'd be forced to take the car to the dealer to get the problem fixed instead of fixing it yourself or taking it to a mechanic (but the mechanics usually have the tool anyway.) He said that the previous year's model didn't have this feature, and it wasn't mechanically required and the computer wasn't added for safety or efficiency (after all, the part was failing even with the computer there, and the computer didn't even tell me it was breaking...I figured it out because the car was doing the same thing my other car did before the part failed.)
I called the dealer, and they told me it would be a minimum of $700, but probably closer to $1000, and then proceeded to try to find everything possible wrong with the car so they could add more charges...including bad tires which had just been replaced a couple weeks beforehand (and both my mechanic and the company I bought the tires from checked them out and found no issue with them.) When they told me it would be close to a sixth of the original cost of the vehicle (that was less than six years old) to fix everything, I thanked them for their time and left without getting anything repaired.
The last time I took my car to the dealer, they installed a part incorrectly (a towing break controller, which is kinda a big thing to do right,) charged me $500, and then I had to take the part out, rewire it so that it was installed correctly, and had to pay for the parts to fix it. Luckily I had my mechanic check it over to make sure it was installed correctly and safe.
I took the car back to the mechanic I trusted, paid the $500, and the car was fixed...and then vowed never to buy anything from that manufacturer ever again.
Coopers may be the largest Australian owned brewery
Which kinda proves my point. It is the same here in the US between AMBEV and SABMiller, with both trying to fight each other over "King of Beers" and "Champagne of Beers" (neither of which is true or even makes sense,) or trying to trademark "Lite". Or AMBEV and SABMiller going after smaller brewers who dare call their beer Pumpkin Ale or whatever they have called them.
They can't win by taste (although they have a huge marketshare of free and cold/cheap beer drinkers, they are still (h/t Eric Idle) like having sex in a canoe,) and they can't attract people who have chosen to drink better beer from microbrews, so they use their marketshare and the crappy legal system (the higher courts) to make things difficult for the microbrews and each other.
Never tasted Coopers (probably would pass if it was offered,) and can't stand Fosters (which I equate to the same word that I use for the American majors, piss.) Pretty much think the same of Asahi and Kirin (though they do make an awesome chocolate porter, but I consider that to be a fluke, since the only place I can seem to find it is in Tokyo at one of the many 7 & I-Holdings convenience stores and nowhere else.)
A better question is whether anyone learned anything from Caldera.
The SCO Group?
Unfortunately, no. I don't think anyone even involved in the SCO fiasco even learned anything. I believe Darl McBride left on a golden parachute and the principles of the company went through bankruptcy and the company was bought at pennies by another company (UnXis, I believe.)