Even then, equal treatment is a myth. The privileged treatment of the cops and government may be favorable to cops and the government, but is certainly not "equal treatment".
You mean the bandwidth that Comcast customers are already paying for?
Allowing competing apps in their store would be an improvement, but really they should do what Android does: allow you to install apps locally and from alternative app stores.
Yes. Any deal that "you have to take RIGHT NOW or you'll miss out!" is a scam.
Not really, because the US didn't exist when the revolution happened, so it didn't get scrapped.
Why did Congress let LEOs tell lies?
I submit the answer is that they've spent so much time creating and listening to lies that they've long ago lost the ability to tell what's a lie and what isn't.
Having a "public advocate" is better than nothing, but no matter how earnest or effective such an advocate is, it does nothing to really affect the fact that the FISC is a serious miscarriage of justice. It's a fake court used to justify the erosion and elimination of the rights of citizens.
Rumors can be true. A rumor is an unsubstantiated claim. Unsubstantiated claims can be accurate claims, and yet are still rumors until substantiated.
A 10 to me might be a 5 to you and vice-versa.
The opinion only notes that he is "satisfied" the FBI is "addressing the issue."
"They could make all the non-critical apps removable for sure."
They can't, actually. The stock Android that Google makes doesn't do any of that -- the issue is that the manufacturers have taken Android and modified it to do that sort of thing.
Since Android is open source, Google has no power to tell them to stop directly. They might be able to leverage the use of the Android trademark or the Google apps to force different behavior, but that's not a quick fix.
This has happened twice now:
I've been researching a topic online and got a search result that led to a scanned book result. I read the couple of pages of the scan and realized that the book being excerpted contains exactly what I'm looking for. I buy the book.
"The customer isn't always right and sometimes it's cheaper in the long run to say good bye to that customer versus doing everything possible to keep them."
Well, I agree with what you mean here, but there's a much more accurate way to say it: what a business can provide is not always able to meet what the customer demands.
It's not a matter of right or wrong. Netflix deciding to fight VPN usage is not right or wrong, it's a business decision. If a company makes a business decision that you as a customer disagrees with, you complain and try to get the company to change. If the company does not change, you either accept it or stop doing business with them.
Personally, my decision was to cancel my account. It's not a boycott, and I'm not punishing Netflix. I just made a business decision that they no longer offer a service I'm willing to pay for.
I'm personally responsible for getting Netflix at least a half dozen new customers.
It's the problem with text: it makes everything sound so much more somber than it is. I understood Karl, but defended him badly. :)
Perhaps. But isn't it at least as plausible that they saw how compliant US citizens become when terrorized, and liked it? It makes everything so much easier for them.
Lose [inventions the public funded are privatized, denying the public the use of them except as a monetized consumer]
This inconsequential customer is no longer a customer.
"So a few people had their time wasted, is that such a big deal?"
The big deal isn't the wasting of the time.
Re:
I am not suspicious the whole thing is a racket. I am 100% certain that the whole thing is a racket.