LinkedIn users really, really don't like to have their information harvested and used to become the targets of spam campaigns and unsolicited contact. And yet, you've managed to equate this with people pulling taxpayer-funded academic papers out from behind paywalls.
Save your outrage for a better target. I'm actually pretty glad LinkedIn is going after these bottom-feeders.
Once you go on-premises at a LEC, they care. Poles? Nope. Best thing a municipality can do is exercise eminent domain and own the poles. You can sub the maintenance of the poles out to a bidder, which is like NOTHING, then lease attachment to the utilities.
I wonder how much they pay in taxes for those poles...
The layout will damn the Spirit of the Sun. The layout is almost a perfect copy of the Fire Floor's logo: large graphic of fire cooking "something" on left, use of Caslon Antique as your font, use "Churrascaria Brazilian Steakhouse" as the tagline... I dunno, that pretty derivative, and if it's derivative with only a few changes, it could be confusing or misleading. They certainly compete in the exact same space.
So, it's not "fire" that's at issue here, but as usual on Techdirt, accurate reporting never gets in the way of outrage.
GPS is not accurate enough for a court of law. Civilian GPS is deliberately incorrect -- errors are injected into results to prevent it from being used to commit terrorist acts like setting up mortar fields of fire, I guess. In any case, you'd lose that fight.
Radar equipment is calibrated on each shift by the officer running the radar unit. If you want to call that into question, make sure you know your math really well and have a solid, unique attack because judges have seen and heard them all. You will most definitely need to appeal it a few times to get heard -- muni judges will routinely announce that they will not entertain indictments against the technology.
Getting off with a warning should not outrage you. If you were black, you'd have gotten a ticket at the very least. Enjoy your white privilege. BTW, all Anonymous Cowards are white people to me.
You'll never ever ever get a cop in trouble for investigating something that looks wrong to them. Never. It's called "probable" cause for a reason, and you don't get to indict it unless you attend an academy and get instructed on it. You're just operating from ignorance.
And that's fine. Techdirt is an interesting site for me, but it's comically anti-cop and shockingly ill-informed about law enforcement in general. So, I do what I can to tell you people you suck at this, just to balance it out.
They have service manuals for almost all of their appliances, and an abundant and competitive parts economy. I can price parts from three unrelated websites for refrigerators, ranges, dishwashers, whatever and get not only a good price, but a repair sheet. And Sears service manuals are good enough to help you rewire a dishwasher, if you happen to need to do that (pro tip: always lock the hamster cage with the hamster in it).
Police unions protect their membership from political vagaries, guarantee a minimum livable wage, and provide protection for workers that are in harm's way every single day. You're too young, and probably too lazy to read about how hard and miserable it was to be a police officer in the 60s, but there were no bulletproof vests, paid sick leave, pensions, or basic benefits that are typically taken for granted by many of us.
But from your perception, police unions just want to cover up the bad actors in the department. Well, that's mighty unfair from my perspective, but since you're too lazy to actually qualify any of your statements, go have another bag of Doritos instead.
Look, let's agree to separate supply and commodity, just like gas companies.
I want Verizon to connect me to the Internet. Period. Don't block ports, don't tell me what to do, don't tell me how to do it, don't force me to use specific devices. Everything they do to diminish the experience adds up to an undirected rage of helplessness, generated by them. This is the source of the anger.
If I want TV, give me TV. Bundle it, whatever, just give me access to the content and let me figure out how I want to see it. Don't block my ability to skip commercials, watch picture-in-picture, or save episodes for later. Don't put a "Subscribed Channel" filter on my set-top and then list non-subscribed content to tease me.
Play fair. I think they are incapable of fair play, and so that's why they must be punished.
A true historical oddity, the monopoly that won't die.
When AT&T had to break open its device stranglehold on its ratepayers, you kept the spirit alive. Not content to charge freight for carrying bits, you keep the Bad Old Days alive with mandatory device restrictions (complete with port 4567 backdoors, for your protection!), mandatory device requirements (adapter for every stream, anyone?), crippled services (any FiOS customers have picture-in-picture? no? of course you don't), and unethical price hikes (oh no, it's a fee separate from that pay-one-price deal we hooked you with two years ago).
Don't think we're just limited to FiOS folks. VZW customers also enjoy the same stupidity! Lock down those phones, don't want someone blocking ads or removing the bloatware. Shhhh, don't mention that supercookie you can't kill, or APN you can't modify. Tether? Only if it's around your neck so we can slowly strangle you with more fees. Hotspot access? No way, we control the transport *and* the endpoints. Why? Because that's the law we bought, and we have more money than you do.
Awesome company. Deserves to be broken up and put under a DoJ consent decree. Okay. I'm done now.
... then there's this nitpicky overwrought discussion into minutae that makes me just give up caring. This is an academic exercise. Applying it in the real world is a waste of resources, and it's jerkoffs like you that actually perpetuate it by discussing it seriously.
"Most robocallers make heavy use of number spoofing technology, meaning that fighting robocalling will always be a massive game of Whac-a-Mole no matter what."
It's like that because Verizon, among others, makes money by supplying the arms in this arms race, Once CallerID was out in 1985, the next step was charging fees to block it, then fees to reveal it, then additional fees to SUPERBLOCK it. Also, telcos created CID, and they can certainly provide ANI instead and allow you to block that... but why stop the gravy train?
These are the same people that charge you a fee to pack data into signaling packets that they are shipping whether you use them or not. I hope the FCC goes after that next.