Donald Trump yesterday:
"And I think you just read — it just came out minutes ago, the small business report — small businesses as of just now are booming, hiring people. One of the best reports they’ve seen in many years."
A physical connection that they already had.
Things the author missed:
* I already paid for internet anyway
* I already paid for Netflix and Amazon (for shipping) anyway
* Cable adds about $35-$50 in hidden fees compared to the price they quote
* We weren't watching 99% of the channels on cable
* You can subscribe for a limited time. I got Sling (for ESPN) only during College Football season. That's only 4 months. I cancelled now.
"Companies like AT&T and DirecTV have "solved" the problem"
Should be:
Companies like AT&T and Dish have "solved" the problem
ESPN is correct. The numbers ARE wrong.
They don't count:
Cordcutters sharing their parents' accounts (who are still watching ads)
Cordcutting services such as Sling, Vue, DirecTVNow, etc. Nielsen has no way of counting these yet.
Nielsen is saying, "We are correctly counting traditional OTA broadcast and cable/satellite subscribers."
ESPN is saying, "A lot of cordcutters still watch us and we would really like those numbers to be included when calculating ad rates."
We talk about this all the time on cord cutting forums.
You are misled to believe that it is more. But you are not paying taxes, broadcast fees, sports fees, additional outlet fees, etc. on pure internet.
This saves $30 or more.
I used to write software for police departments. Security truly was all or nothing.
Some departments were so secure I had to send them blind SQL statements to update their database which I could never view. These SQL statements would be, of course, gone over with a fine-toothed comb prior to execution. And you could never hook a computer up to their network. You had to use theirs with a secure remote desktop to your own machine that couldn't transfer files. If you wanted to deliver software, it had to be done in a prescribed way to be scanned first. And you had to have a background check first or you never even got to do any of that.
Others would beg us to come in on a remote desktop with a single shared password that never changed and that everyone who ever worked there knew. And they would just let us do anything we wanted with full admin rights, even though we were just contractors.
It was stunning how all or nothing it was.
And don't forget that the accelerator always seems to stick right at the posted speed when driving in the fast lane.
Yeah. In the Prenda model, he's playing the Brett Gibbs role.
Almost everything in that movie is based on an actual event. It's just not that all the events were the same person.
Saying that WarGames is very, very fictional is a gross overstatement that obscures the fact that hacks similar to all of those shown in the movie had, in fact, already happened to a similar level (although nukes didn't almost get launched, someone did hack into a server that helped control nukes).
This is EXACTLY what will happen. The US will become the internet black hole of the world.
The Dodgers have been selling merchandise with just LA on it for over 60 years.
No it's not. It would probably only take an hour or so to switch auto-payments.
Convictions can literally take years sometimes. Having a criminal enterprise be able to continue to use their money for years before seizure ensures that they will move it elsewhere and claim it's unrelated. That's untenable and makes the seizures pointless.
What they have done, is ensure that the seizures are used for their original purpose:
* Large dollar amounts (organized crime, not $200 in some dude's wallet)
* Charged with certain crimes (again, not charged with obstruction or resisting arrest or a traffic violation)
etc.
Yes. But it's not merely that. EA said, “invites users to support the English football premier league’s Rainbow Laces action, a massive campaign in support of LGBT”.
Agree or disagree, this violates the Russian law.
Too bad you didn't have a camera so you could send a video to the media.
A one-second Google search led me to a product in a class of products that are routinely sold:
http://www.sallybeauty.com/shimmer-lights-shampoo/SBS-264028,default,pd.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=SHO&cm_mmc=google-_-SHO-_-cpc-_-keyword&gclid=CjwKEAiAyanCBRDkiO6M_rDroH0SJAAfZ4KLetevDcxazgz1sKYvaoFVZCpULP3RXwZArBSt91Y0-BoC7OPw_wcB
Conditioning Shampoo compare to Clairol Shimmer Lights Original Conditioning Shampoo
The compare to trademark is written right on the bottle, and yet my wife has been buying products like these for her hair for decades. It has already been found to be legal.
So he could call it "Jupiter Hell compare to Doom" and he would be legally perfectly in the clear.
Shark Tank isn't being picked up the way he would like it to be.
Re: To quote Bruce Springsteen's song
Weird Al's I Can't Watch This (set to U Can't Touch This by MC Hammer)
"I hooked up 80 channels, and each one stunk."
That was in 1992!