My understanding is that spam filters can only know it's forged if the domain has an SPF record on it with authorized mail servers. That's not the case here.
Couldn't the person that now owns the domain put up an SPF record different than the email server that Chipotle is using and cause their emails to be rejected by many spam filters?
I'm aware that there is a cost but it's a licensing cost and not a marginal cost. The real question is how much of the average consumer's cable bill goes into paying those broadcast licenses as opposed to paying for all of the other costs a cable company experiences.
Many people are under the assumption that if they were able to pay for a plan that had 10 times fewer channels then their cable bill would be 10 times less. This is simply not true. I admit, I don't know how much cheaper an a la carte plan could be but I'd like to see research that answers this question. Until then, I'll continue to see most of these complaints as ignorant.
It seems to me that the complaints about channel bundling aren't fair. There's no additional marginal cost for delivering 5 channels vs 50. Why should cable companies deliver less channels than technology allows just to satisfy a consumer misunderstanding in how cable transmission works?
Re: Re:
My understanding is that spam filters can only know it's forged if the domain has an SPF record on it with authorized mail servers. That's not the case here.
Couldn't the person that now owns the domain put up an SPF record different than the email server that Chipotle is using and cause their emails to be rejected by many spam filters?
Re: Re: Bundling
I'm aware that there is a cost but it's a licensing cost and not a marginal cost.
The real question is how much of the average consumer's cable bill goes into paying those broadcast licenses as opposed to paying for all of the other costs a cable company experiences.
Many people are under the assumption that if they were able to pay for a plan that had 10 times fewer channels then their cable bill would be 10 times less. This is simply not true.
I admit, I don't know how much cheaper an a la carte plan could be but I'd like to see research that answers this question. Until then, I'll continue to see most of these complaints as ignorant.
It seems to me that the complaints about channel bundling aren't fair. There's no additional marginal cost for delivering 5 channels vs 50. Why should cable companies deliver less channels than technology allows just to satisfy a consumer misunderstanding in how cable transmission works?
Words can't express how much I hope they do this.
Good encryption software should be available to all.