I have over 200 domains right now, some of which I am using, some I am holding for the future. Eventually, I intend to monetize many of them, but this will take some effort over time.
It's just the cost of doing business, and even at 200 is not that much of a cost in the scheme of things. I have much bigger fish to fry over trying to save a few pennies on a domain name or two.
Godaddy is just $10 a year -- not a lot of money, even by poverty standards. What is it with all this namby-pamby BS when you'll spend more in a day's lunch than it's worth mulling over saving a buck a year with a different registar.
I guess some people need something to complain about!
It really depends on a number of factors. I don't think anyone can make a general claim for one over the other. A smart algorithm can beat data augmentation in some cases. Of course, creating the algorithm is the crux of the matter, one that is harder to put a definition on.
So, the upshot is to look at both approaches and take the best course of action for your needs.
As we all know, patents today are little more than big sticks Very Big Corporations (VBCs) use against each other to gain leverage in the marketplace. The original intent of the patent is long since lost.
Some real consideration should be given to getting rid of patents altogether. Really, do they serve any real usefulness other than the stuff of Big Corporate Sticks? It's way too expensive for the little guy to get a patent; still even more expensive for the little guy to defend his patent against VBCs that have deep pockets.
But, seriously, what would happen to the marketplace if patents were to be thrown out tomorrow? Would innovation cease? I don't think so. It would change for sure, but it may actually change for the better, giving the Little Guy an edge, a leg up, since he would not fear being crushed out of financial existence by VBCs.
Really, I don't know how the patent examiners could possibly be knowledgeable about all the various areas of mathematics, science, and technology that has grown exponentially since patents were created.
"I agree with most of what you said, but how can you make the above determination without pulling him over and taking a look?"
Well, think about that for a moment. And let me give you a similar scenario, one that happened to me a lot. Someone out of the blue calls the police on you because she thinks you're "suspicious". You've done nothing wrong at all, but someone thinks you did. The cops come and bother you. Perhaps they make you late getting to the airport and miss your flight. Or perhaps you were on your way to pick up your kids. Or who knows? But the police officer pulls you over and ties up 30 or more minutes of your time while he does a background check on you to make sure you're not some sort of criminal. When you complain to him about this, he says to you, "Well, I agree with what you say, but how can I make a determination without pulling you over and checking you out?"
Suppose that kept happening to you over and over and over and over again. Someone phones the cops on you. You've done nothing wrong at all. Cops come and disrupts your life and check you out. Sometimes they're polite. Sometimes they're not. Sometimes they actually may put you in handcuffs. And on an on. But they "have to do this because they need to 'check you out.'"
Would you be happy with this treatment? Would you really be OK with it because they have a "need" to see if you're a criminal or not? Be honest.
"I'm not really a conspiracy theorist here. Say what you will about the government wanting to keep people afraid to do whatever its nefarious schemes are. You don't need to build radiological detectors at border crossings to do that. Further, we're talking about a matter where, as far as I can tell, nobody's "basic rights" have been taken away. This system has plenty of false positives, yet nobody's been imprisoned because of it. As far as I know, you have no right when entering the country to deny a search by customs and border security, particularly if they have a good reason to search (such as emitting radiation beyond the level expected in most vehicles). So, while accusing the government of trying to take away your liberties and keep you afraid may be true, it's no more relevant to the discussion than the fact that your attempt to make they government into a rights-stealing bogeyman."
As far as the government being a "rights stealing bogeyman", as you so colourfully put it, all I have to say is look at the state of affairs before and after 911. Shortly after 911 -- and I mean a day or two -- the news commentators were already chirping about what rights we'd have to "give up".
The government has been snatching our rights a little here, a little there, over the years, and when something big like 911 happens, it takes our rights in big chunks because there is "justification" for it.
I am not just talking about crossing borders, of course, and I've had my fair share of border crossing issues.
In most cases, you may not even realize your rights have been compromised until you run into an occasion where you need them. Then it's too late. But you and everyone else is welcome to stay asleep on the matter. Or you can fight to protect what few rights still remaining to you and to gain back what was lost.
Drug testing everywhere, as it is today, is another fine example of invasion of rights and privacy. But you want a job, don't you? Yes, this is more corporate than anything, but it has been spurred on by the government's silly anti-drug campaigns, where they stand against use of even marijuana, which is far less deadly than tobacco or alcohol. Many have lost property and liberty over consensual transactions or personal possession.
But hey, I'm just making government out to be the rights-snatching bogeyman. These things really aren't taking place, now are they?
I love technology. But I hate it when said technology is put to misuse in the hands of those who would not spend our precious tax dollars wisely. Need I remind you of the joke of the SDI program in the past? Or the needless war that's going on now chewing up billions if not trillions of your tax dollars? But wait, they're not even collecting that much from us! Where is the extra money coming from? How is it to be ever paid back? By raising your taxes even higher? But you worked hard for that money to provide for yourself and your family. Oh well, tough. Big Boys want to play. Too bad.
"Same thing with drugs. Sometimes the sniffing dog hits on the door handle, when the big payoff is shielded in the gas tank."
And those times when there is no payoff, that is my concern. You've disrupted the life of an innocent person. But no one seems to care about the innocent anymore.
"How was the person harassed? The agent pulled him over, questioned him, then let him go. Justified, since they detected radiation source. Doesn't sound like harassment to me. If they ran up to him with guns drawn, cuffed him, questioned him for several hours, then yes, that would be harassment.
"
Justified from whose perspective? The cat? The cat's owner?
As one who have been repeatedly been pulled over, visited, and questioned by police when I've done nothing wrong, there is no justification for intruding on the peace of mind of the innocent.
Sorry, but unless that man actually were carrying a radiological device, bothering him is an intrusion on his peace and his life, even if they did "let him go." So does that mean that they will keep pulling him over every darn time he gets cancer treatment for his cat, or drives with his cat somewhere they have detectors? Would you want to be pulled over again and again and again when you've done nothing wrong? If that were to happen to you, would you not see that as harassment?
We really need to revisit the Rights of the Innocent in this country. Basically, all the rights of the innocent have been systematically stripped away, made easy with your latest and greatest technologies. Perhaps you don't mind the NSA tapping your every phone calls and email correspondences and putting them through their supercomputer farms just to see if you are a terrorist or not. But I think most people would have a problem with that!
As far as I'm concerned, if I haven't done anything wrong, then don't bug me. If you (law enforcement, NSA, Homeland Insecurity, FBI, etc.) do, you are invading my peace and my privacy as well. It IS harassment, plain and simple, and I for one will NOT stand for it. And neither should you if you care anything about your own rights.
Perhaps you should see the Minority Report. Basically, we're talking about the same thing here.
"No, the eggheads are quite familiar with exactly how effective they are and with potential ways of circumventing the security. While it's nice to pretend you're far more clever than they, it's not so. If you happen to go to a physics meeting where they're doing presentations on radiological detectors, they're more than happy to lay out in detail the failings of the system."
I would like to believe they are, but I remain unconvinced. Like I said, a chemical explosive or even a deadly chemical compound, like the one used in Japan a few years back, would be even more effective than a radiological device and would NOT be detectable by a roadside detector.
So, if you put all your eggs into the high-tech basket, a low tech way will be found around it by people far less bright than you or I.
But that misses the entire issue of whether or not a real threat exists in the first place vs. the Government looking for ways to keep the fear level in the public high. People in fear are very easy to control and take away basic rights from, in case you have not noticed what's been going on since 9/11.
A radioactive cat that just underwent cancer treatment? A cat is not a radiological bomb. Obviously, their detectors are way too sensitive.
But more importantly, this is an innocent person that was harassed by the Homeland Insecurity types over something he'd done legitimately. What a waste of time and effort.
If someone really does have a radiological weapon, all he has to do now is shield it in layers of lead to escape detection -- or have a radiological cat as a decoy.
I suppose they'll harass people who just underwent cancer treatment as well. Wow. I feel so secure now.
Of course, chemical-based bombs can do a lot of damage as well, but obviously this detector won't pick that up. What a waste of taxpayer's dollars.
Low-tech can always thwart high-tech, anytime. The would-be terrorist on a shoestring budget can always find a low-tech way to circumvent these million-dollar high tech measures. Meanwhile, some egg-heads in government revel in the false sense of security they now have.
Of course, it begs to reason how much of a real "treat" of "terrorism" there really is. Oh, but the big government contractors are loving the windfall from the paranoia. Well, that's the US for ya. Fear for Profit! Yeah, the American Way.
As an accomplished Autodidact, and as an avid proponent of OpenSource, and also having 30 years in the Computer field, here's what I have to say.
Firstly, in this field of Computer Science/Information Technology/Whatever you want to call it this month, most shops are looking to see if you can actually do the work they are looking to fulfil. They typically are not impressed by letters after your name from some prestigious institution, because many who *do* have all the fancy degrees can't do the job.
Secondly, having said that, there are some places who are sticklers for degrees, but these tend to be jobs in finance or government-related contracts or other degree-snoots, but I don't consider those types pleasant to work for.
Thirdly, if you do quite a few popular FOSS projects, that exposure will be far more valuable to you than any degree from MIT. It will gain you world-wide recognition among the OpenSource Cognoscenti, and will open many doors for you that you otherwise would not know about. You won't have to go to them; they will come to you. And you won't be stuck paying off an educational debt for the next 10 years after you graduate.
So my advice to you -- take it with a grain of salt if you wish -- work on some killer FOSS apps and get them out there. Pick an area of need and create a solution for it that many will want and be greatful to you for. Or create something wicked cool that we in the OpenSource/Linux community can use and make our jobs easier or will be lots of fun.
After having done one or two successful OpenSource projects, you may find that you'll do just fine without a snooty degree from MIT.
Or you can still pursue that, but then may have the means to do so. Many possibilities lie in front of you.
What is it with this $75K cutoff? Some friends of mine believe that taxes should be raised for those earning $75K or better. Of course, those who say that themselves earn less than that mark. And it's a good thing I am tolerant as a friend else I would stop hanging around them, as I'm above that cutoff mark.
Even though I am above that cutoff mark, so what? Believe it or not, I am still struggling to make ends meet, yet I would like for my kids to go to MIT or some other top school that will give them an edge in this ever-increasingly global marketplace.
Nix all the evoting crap and go back to paper ballots. We know that paper ballots work, and are a LOT harder to fudge to the level of throwing an election.
On the whole of it, I have a big problem with the "Winner takes all" system anyway, with the majority giving the power to a handful to beat up on us all. Not even getting into how the Republicans and the Democrats systemically shuts out all other parties.
But if we are going to have voting, at least make it fair. Give equal time to ALL parties, not just the D-R club, and use paper ballots under tight security. At least make "Democracy" less of a joke than it already is.
Having been a Windows NT/2000 Developer up to 2000, and having made the nice switch to Linux, I feel as though I have a good insight on both systems.
With Linux, I can download and compile the kernel, and play around with kernel-level features. Can't do that with Windows.
With Windows, I had to sign up with MSDN to get anything done. With Linux, I can Google most answers I need. Now to be fair, Google simply was not around for most of my Windows days, but hey, most of the popular Linux applications -- like MySQL and Apache -- are extremely well documented. The rest I can usually find some examples or just explore to see what happens!
Scripting under Linux is very complete -- you almost don't have to do any C or C++ programming at all unless you are writing device drivers or compute-intensive applications. Even for the compute-intensive stuff, you could get by with Java these days.
Where I work, when all of my Windows colleagues get hit with spyware and trojan horses, I smile knowing that I am invunerable to such exploits.
I also like having the choice of many distros. Currently, Ubuntu has my eye, and I like it better than Fedora.
These days, the only reason I have Windows installed anywhere at all is because there are a few applications that aren't available for Linux yet -- though that list is shrinking fast.
So I do Linux because Linux is wicked cool, and lets me get as close to bare metal as I like are abstract as far from as I like too.
"The content providers are in a massive quandary: their revenue stream is dependent on people watching newly created content, because that's what commands the biggest premium and causes people to actually buy stuff. When people start to turn to stuff that is either already sitting in their library or that's a reproduction of an existing work (i.e., where the heavy creative lifting has already been done), they are not willing to pay "new" prices for that content. In other words, content providers and distributors are competing against themselves even when they put out quality stuff. Even if they kill piracy completely, their best days are behind them. The only thing that can bring them the massive profit margins is if they manage to pass a law that requires pay-per-view on ALL creative material, regardless of age or ownership. It's no surprise they're working on such laws on a continuous basis."
You make really good points -- yes, they are competing against a lot. And now that the Internet makes it even easier to access the old media, the competition is as fierce as ever.
All the networks, indeed all of cable, suffers from a lack of quality programming. Even "newcomers" such as the Discovery Network, the Sci-Fi Channel, and the Science channel started off great but sled down the slippery slopes to mediocrity.
Why should I spend $100 a month for lack of quality programming despite the vast array of "choices" of hundreds of channels
There was a time I had both Satellite and Cable TV; now I have neither. It is simply easier to BitTorrent the few things I like, and sans the rest. Then I can watch what I want at my leisure, on my schedule, free of commercials that rarely, if ever, promote anything I am interested in anyway.
If the network providers like NBC, CBS, etc. can't understand that, the to balls with them. I am more than happy to pay for quality, and that also means not being inundated with bazillions of commercials that take me out of the story anyway.
NBC is its own problem. They now have to compete with YouTube and MySpace and MMORPGs and everything else we can do online. That's the real thing that is killing them. They just can't compete, and they use P2P as a scapegoat to whine about their "losses".
Even the news outlets like MSNBC and CNN leave a lot to be desired, which is obviously more interested in the corporate bottom line and political correctness than reporting real news. I always find it amusing to read on the BBC website interesting news happening in my "backyard" here in the US without seeing any reference of the same on our own news outlets. Funny that.
Give Me Quality Content, and I will be more than happy to give you my eyes, and maybe a few bills as well.
Slashdot Mirror
It's just the cost of doing business, and even at 200 is not that much of a cost in the scheme of things. I have much bigger fish to fry over trying to save a few pennies on a domain name or two.
I guess some people need something to complain about!
So, the upshot is to look at both approaches and take the best course of action for your needs.
Metabolomics has progressed from urine to spittle! Wow, and less smelly!
Some real consideration should be given to getting rid of patents altogether. Really, do they serve any real usefulness other than the stuff of Big Corporate Sticks? It's way too expensive for the little guy to get a patent; still even more expensive for the little guy to defend his patent against VBCs that have deep pockets.
But, seriously, what would happen to the marketplace if patents were to be thrown out tomorrow? Would innovation cease? I don't think so. It would change for sure, but it may actually change for the better, giving the Little Guy an edge, a leg up, since he would not fear being crushed out of financial existence by VBCs.
Really, I don't know how the patent examiners could possibly be knowledgeable about all the various areas of mathematics, science, and technology that has grown exponentially since patents were created.
Well, think about that for a moment. And let me give you a similar scenario, one that happened to me a lot. Someone out of the blue calls the police on you because she thinks you're "suspicious". You've done nothing wrong at all, but someone thinks you did. The cops come and bother you. Perhaps they make you late getting to the airport and miss your flight. Or perhaps you were on your way to pick up your kids. Or who knows? But the police officer pulls you over and ties up 30 or more minutes of your time while he does a background check on you to make sure you're not some sort of criminal. When you complain to him about this, he says to you, "Well, I agree with what you say, but how can I make a determination without pulling you over and checking you out?"
Suppose that kept happening to you over and over and over and over again. Someone phones the cops on you. You've done nothing wrong at all. Cops come and disrupts your life and check you out. Sometimes they're polite. Sometimes they're not. Sometimes they actually may put you in handcuffs. And on an on. But they "have to do this because they need to 'check you out.'"
Would you be happy with this treatment? Would you really be OK with it because they have a "need" to see if you're a criminal or not? Be honest.
As far as the government being a "rights stealing bogeyman", as you so colourfully put it, all I have to say is look at the state of affairs before and after 911. Shortly after 911 -- and I mean a day or two -- the news commentators were already chirping about what rights we'd have to "give up".
The government has been snatching our rights a little here, a little there, over the years, and when something big like 911 happens, it takes our rights in big chunks because there is "justification" for it.
I am not just talking about crossing borders, of course, and I've had my fair share of border crossing issues.
In most cases, you may not even realize your rights have been compromised until you run into an occasion where you need them. Then it's too late. But you and everyone else is welcome to stay asleep on the matter. Or you can fight to protect what few rights still remaining to you and to gain back what was lost.
Drug testing everywhere, as it is today, is another fine example of invasion of rights and privacy. But you want a job, don't you? Yes, this is more corporate than anything, but it has been spurred on by the government's silly anti-drug campaigns, where they stand against use of even marijuana, which is far less deadly than tobacco or alcohol. Many have lost property and liberty over consensual transactions or personal possession.
But hey, I'm just making government out to be the rights-snatching bogeyman. These things really aren't taking place, now are they?
I love technology. But I hate it when said technology is put to misuse in the hands of those who would not spend our precious tax dollars wisely. Need I remind you of the joke of the SDI program in the past? Or the needless war that's going on now chewing up billions if not trillions of your tax dollars? But wait, they're not even collecting that much from us! Where is the extra money coming from? How is it to be ever paid back? By raising your taxes even higher? But you worked hard for that money to provide for yourself and your family. Oh well, tough. Big Boys want to play. Too bad.
And those times when there is no payoff, that is my concern. You've disrupted the life of an innocent person. But no one seems to care about the innocent anymore.
Justified from whose perspective? The cat? The cat's owner?
As one who have been repeatedly been pulled over, visited, and questioned by police when I've done nothing wrong, there is no justification for intruding on the peace of mind of the innocent.
Sorry, but unless that man actually were carrying a radiological device, bothering him is an intrusion on his peace and his life, even if they did "let him go." So does that mean that they will keep pulling him over every darn time he gets cancer treatment for his cat, or drives with his cat somewhere they have detectors? Would you want to be pulled over again and again and again when you've done nothing wrong? If that were to happen to you, would you not see that as harassment?
We really need to revisit the Rights of the Innocent in this country. Basically, all the rights of the innocent have been systematically stripped away, made easy with your latest and greatest technologies. Perhaps you don't mind the NSA tapping your every phone calls and email correspondences and putting them through their supercomputer farms just to see if you are a terrorist or not. But I think most people would have a problem with that!
As far as I'm concerned, if I haven't done anything wrong, then don't bug me. If you (law enforcement, NSA, Homeland Insecurity, FBI, etc.) do, you are invading my peace and my privacy as well. It IS harassment, plain and simple, and I for one will NOT stand for it. And neither should you if you care anything about your own rights.
Perhaps you should see the Minority Report. Basically, we're talking about the same thing here.
I would like to believe they are, but I remain unconvinced. Like I said, a chemical explosive or even a deadly chemical compound, like the one used in Japan a few years back, would be even more effective than a radiological device and would NOT be detectable by a roadside detector.
So, if you put all your eggs into the high-tech basket, a low tech way will be found around it by people far less bright than you or I.
But that misses the entire issue of whether or not a real threat exists in the first place vs. the Government looking for ways to keep the fear level in the public high. People in fear are very easy to control and take away basic rights from, in case you have not noticed what's been going on since 9/11.
But more importantly, this is an innocent person that was harassed by the Homeland Insecurity types over something he'd done legitimately. What a waste of time and effort.
If someone really does have a radiological weapon, all he has to do now is shield it in layers of lead to escape detection -- or have a radiological cat as a decoy.
I suppose they'll harass people who just underwent cancer treatment as well. Wow. I feel so secure now.
Of course, chemical-based bombs can do a lot of damage as well, but obviously this detector won't pick that up. What a waste of taxpayer's dollars.
Low-tech can always thwart high-tech, anytime. The would-be terrorist on a shoestring budget can always find a low-tech way to circumvent these million-dollar high tech measures. Meanwhile, some egg-heads in government revel in the false sense of security they now have.
Of course, it begs to reason how much of a real "treat" of "terrorism" there really is. Oh, but the big government contractors are loving the windfall from the paranoia. Well, that's the US for ya. Fear for Profit! Yeah, the American Way.
- Firstly, in this field of Computer Science/Information Technology/Whatever you want to call it this month, most shops are looking to see if you can actually do the work they are looking to fulfil. They typically are not impressed by letters after your name from some prestigious institution, because many who *do* have all the fancy degrees can't do the job.
- Secondly, having said that, there are some places who are sticklers for degrees, but these tend to be jobs in finance or government-related contracts or other degree-snoots, but I don't consider those types pleasant to work for.
- Thirdly, if you do quite a few popular FOSS projects, that exposure will be far more valuable to you than any degree from MIT. It will gain you world-wide recognition among the OpenSource Cognoscenti, and will open many doors for you that you otherwise would not know about. You won't have to go to them; they will come to you. And you won't be stuck paying off an educational debt for the next 10 years after you graduate.
So my advice to you -- take it with a grain of salt if you wish -- work on some killer FOSS apps and get them out there. Pick an area of need and create a solution for it that many will want and be greatful to you for. Or create something wicked cool that we in the OpenSource/Linux community can use and make our jobs easier or will be lots of fun.After having done one or two successful OpenSource projects, you may find that you'll do just fine without a snooty degree from MIT. Or you can still pursue that, but then may have the means to do so. Many possibilities lie in front of you.
Even though I am above that cutoff mark, so what? Believe it or not, I am still struggling to make ends meet, yet I would like for my kids to go to MIT or some other top school that will give them an edge in this ever-increasingly global marketplace.
On the whole of it, I have a big problem with the "Winner takes all" system anyway, with the majority giving the power to a handful to beat up on us all. Not even getting into how the Republicans and the Democrats systemically shuts out all other parties.
But if we are going to have voting, at least make it fair. Give equal time to ALL parties, not just the D-R club, and use paper ballots under tight security. At least make "Democracy" less of a joke than it already is.
I intend to re-read some of his stories and watch 2001 in his honour over the next few days.
Damn it -- something must've gone wrong with that AE-35 unit...
The idiots at MSNBC used "Sci-fi" instead of "Science Ficton", as though Clarke were some cheap pulp writer.
Long Live Clarke!
To Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite.
Did all the military satellites just deorbit?
Arthur C Clarke was my Number One Science Fiction author. It is sad to see him come to an end.
Not that LED Art (and advertisements, if you recall the other idiot overreaction to the LED ads in Boston) is "illegal", but...
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a BOMB to Mass Holes!
Well, now I've said it.
Once again Google Creates something that is Hypercool. Well, it will be once they work out the bugs in the display.
Having been a Windows NT/2000 Developer up to 2000, and having made the nice switch to Linux, I feel as though I have a good insight on both systems.
With Linux, I can download and compile the kernel, and play around with kernel-level features. Can't do that with Windows.
With Windows, I had to sign up with MSDN to get anything done. With Linux, I can Google most answers I need. Now to be fair, Google simply was not around for most of my Windows days, but hey, most of the popular Linux applications -- like MySQL and Apache -- are extremely well documented. The rest I can usually find some examples or just explore to see what happens!
Scripting under Linux is very complete -- you almost don't have to do any C or C++ programming at all unless you are writing device drivers or compute-intensive applications. Even for the compute-intensive stuff, you could get by with Java these days.
Where I work, when all of my Windows colleagues get hit with spyware and trojan horses, I smile knowing that I am invunerable to such exploits.
I also like having the choice of many distros. Currently, Ubuntu has my eye, and I like it better than Fedora.
These days, the only reason I have Windows installed anywhere at all is because there are a few applications that aren't available for Linux yet -- though that list is shrinking fast.
So I do Linux because Linux is wicked cool, and lets me get as close to bare metal as I like are abstract as far from as I like too.
We make all kinds of mistakes in haste; though those who do these stories should be a bit more circumspect.
That's a link, not an attachment. If it were an attachment, the actual binary of "attachment.exe" would be a part of the email, not a link to it.
You make really good points -- yes, they are competing against a lot. And now that the Internet makes it even easier to access the old media, the competition is as fierce as ever.
Why should I spend $100 a month for lack of quality programming despite the vast array of "choices" of hundreds of channels
There was a time I had both Satellite and Cable TV; now I have neither. It is simply easier to BitTorrent the few things I like, and sans the rest. Then I can watch what I want at my leisure, on my schedule, free of commercials that rarely, if ever, promote anything I am interested in anyway.
If the network providers like NBC, CBS, etc. can't understand that, the to balls with them. I am more than happy to pay for quality, and that also means not being inundated with bazillions of commercials that take me out of the story anyway.
NBC is its own problem. They now have to compete with YouTube and MySpace and MMORPGs and everything else we can do online. That's the real thing that is killing them. They just can't compete, and they use P2P as a scapegoat to whine about their "losses".
Even the news outlets like MSNBC and CNN leave a lot to be desired, which is obviously more interested in the corporate bottom line and political correctness than reporting real news. I always find it amusing to read on the BBC website interesting news happening in my "backyard" here in the US without seeing any reference of the same on our own news outlets. Funny that.
Give Me Quality Content, and I will be more than happy to give you my eyes, and maybe a few bills as well.
What the hell is a "FTP attachment"?
Doesn't make sense.