Besides the TV viewer that has absolutely no interest in sports, a TV viewer might be at home thinking of watching something and is mildly interested in sports so checks the listings. The home team (basketball, baseball, hockey, football, whatever) isn't on so looks elsewhere for some entertainment. The viewer finds a couple of good movies not seen, checks out IMBD for ratings and forgets about sports. After some years of finding home teams are almost never on ESPN and isn't interested in Frisbie golf, decides money can be saved by not subscribing to a package that includes ESPN. Of course, the high cost of the subscription is what ESPN has spent "billions and billions" of dollars for - sports, like basketball, that few will watch. Advertisers must also be ticked off because fewer and fewer eyes see their ads but are unwilling to pay higher fees to subsidize a failing network. ESPN has cash flow problems and starts firing it's high paid analysts. Even sports fanatics become upset at the lower quality of on-air "talent" and move away. ESPN needs a new business model as well as the sports team industry.
First, Congress doesn't regulate anything, Executive Branch agencies write regulations based on laws passed by Congress and signed by the President or overridden by Congress of a presidential veto. Congress certainly may influence regulators, though, and laws may require regulation.
Second, this shows how up to date members of Congress and its staff persons are when it comes to business and particularly businesses focused on technology issues.
The DOJ wants existing Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) modified so the FBI, etc. can continue to compel the production of communications stored overseas without tripping over reluctant US service providers or statutory limitations built into the SCA.
Not sure what these are but if they're real, legally binding treaties approved by the Senate and with foreign countries then the foreign countries need to approve a new treaty as well as the U. S. Senate. Could be tricky.
For electronic voting machines or central tabulating computers having a USB port the system doesn't need to be hacked. It can be destroyed with that $50 USB thumb drive that destroys the machine. Maybe it really is a hack if a concerted effort is made by a nefarious group to vote late in the day at selected precincts where voting histories are known. At least in my county in Colorado we vote using mail in paper ballots or paper ballots at precincts. They can be counted by hand if the readers break down.
It seems to me credit card companies have done the same thing in order to maximize interest charges. Can't remember the exact details so maybe someone else can chime in here with the details. I think those processes have been stopped, but not sure.
How about any commerce site such as Amazon, if it exists in France, big box stores with purchase sites such as the French versions of Best Buy, Macy's, Walmart, etc., or an online clothing merchant? Folks want to see pictures of what they're buying especially if color choice is important.
Maybe this is ridiculous, but will this law affect folks who want to view their cloud saved photo archives or those of others who have given permission to do so? Google, for instance, allows those with an account to save an unlimited number of pics on Google Drive for free if they are acceptable using their compression algorithm. If that's the case, Google should just block access to those archives if a URL points to France. Worse case, delete the archives with a warning about what's to happen and why.
I'm not sure if this is still the situation but it has been the case that the cost of a cable Internet plus low end TV package can be less than the cost of Internet alone. If folks are opting for that pay TV/Internet subscription instead of completely dropping TV while maintaining Internet, the situation for Pay TV may be worse than these numbers show.
The posting asserts, " ...the business of newspapers has never really been "the news business" (no matter how much they insist otherwise). It's always been the community and attention business."
It was Josef Pulitzer in the 1880s who came up with the idea that the profit in newspapers would come from advertising and not from subscription fees. I would maintain the news in newspapers was and is a sideline to advertising, though the news content has some value to subscribers. Maybe today's on line newspaper web sites should return to the Pulitzer business model. They have a problem though: ad blockers derail this idea. Seems to me we have a successful, huge tech company that has adopted Pulitzer's business model. It provides content and applications for free that that have great value to users paid for by advertising.
As others have noted and I see is that newspapers have very little news these days and what pretends to be news is actually features. And they have ad placement as news.
I always thought the BBC could detect the RF emissions from TV sets. Perhaps this is more likely from CRT based sets. Do flat panel displays not having a TV receiver output detectable RF at TV frequencies? If that's the case, the BBC will be knocking on a lot of doors because of all the computer monitors in private homes and millions and millions in businesses.
There are always some kind of announcements about a traditional professional American sport broadcast noting that the descriptions are copyrighted. Not sure whether the game itself is copyrighted. That's the sport involving attempts by participants using a wooden device of cylindrical symmetry to strike a spherical object thrown by an opposing participant in order to propel the spherical object away from defensive participants.
The OP doesn't specify which records he was willing to share whether they were HIPAA protected or appointment records. We also don't know from the report here how four other law suits the dentist brought against patients turned out. I think we need more information.
Maybe off topic, but it does seem the dentist didn't find out the cause of the patient's pain because he didn't do much and asked her to go another dentist. A dentist should be able to diagnose the cause of tooth or jaw pain and either make the repair or recommend a specialist such as an endodontist for a root canal.
7Mbps!! That incredibly fast for Century Link. I know folks who can only get 0.75 Mbps from Century Link. For some reason their parents about a mile away get 0.00 Mbps because there's no possibility of connection.
I just looked up Netflix's stock price today (7/19/2013) and it closed at $85.76, down 13.22% per share. The stock pays no dividend so it's an equity play - buy the stock and increase one's wealth from the increase in the stock price. From the investor point of view, maintaining a constant or declining stock price does nothing without a dividend because you can make more money in a bank savings account. When Netflix becomes a mature company (and it may be there now) maintaining a fixed or very slowly increasing, and not a volatile, share price, it must pay a dividend like other mature companies. For example, Microsoft pays a dividend of $1.44 per annum on a stock costing about $53 or 2.7%. Netflix must improve its product to maintain its user numbers else it won't be able to pay a dividend and be a good investment.
Um..., well HBO now has boxing which seems to have replaced the Wimbledon tennis tournament as its preferred sporting event. Boxing??? It's original content to me is zero stars quality when there is no such thing as a zero star movie.
If everyone who wants Netflix has it than there will be little or no growth. Though the price increase from $9 to $10 is 11%, in absolute terms it is small. In the US those that can afford High Speed Internet to deliver Netflix can surely afford $1 per month extra. My problem with streaming Netflix is the quality and small available content along with the churn in that content. When 90% of everything produced since the advent of talkies is available to stream, Streaming Netflix will get a customer.
It seems to me the cost per Gigabyte should be the amount one pays for data during the billing period divided by the number of Gigabytes used. If you have a 5 Gigabyte/(billing period) plan costing $17.50 per GB, your data bill is $87.50. But if you only use 3.5 GB, your cost per Gigabyte is $25.00.
I'm using Google's Project Fi and I pay $10 per GB of cell data and if I use less than any multiple of a GB I get reimbursed for the unused cell data on my next bill at $0.01 per Mega Byte. There are cheaper plans than Fi if more than 2.5 GB use per month through other MVNOs, but for low cell data users, Project Fi might be a good choice.