The same reason I watch "let's play" videos of games that seem interesting on Steam before I buy them. If I'm going to drop money of any significance I want to make sure I'm better off than throwing it into a trash can. While I personally don't bother with the theaters and just do Netflix--principally for the reason just mentioned--I can easily see them wanting to make sure the $20+/person they're about to drop as a compelling reason to screen the movie aforehand.
Your audacious assertions aside, they must be doing something right since California is the 6th largest economy in the world and a net tax contributor. The states that are antipodes of California tend to skew towards absolute s**tholes, have the poorest, least educated citizens and receive the lion's share of federal supports.
Alas, our mayors like red light fines more than their citizens' well being. All you can expect are abrupt changes to an increasingly briefer yellow signal and perhaps increasing numbers of robots generating the citations. Strangely, you only have Obama to blame.
I can opt into Google if I consider them trustworthy. If where I live there's only evil choice A for ISP in my area (very common), or even if there's also an evil choice B, I still have no choice. You also ignore the confidence/protection codified law brings. While before the rule there was nothing prohibiting selling user data, there was also nothing giving permission to do so either. Lawyers make much of their money off such ambiguity.
Internet connectivity is no more optional than phone service is optional. This was one of the drivers behind common-carrier status for ISPs. It's illegal to buy/sell phone records without the record holder's permission or a writ from a court. The privacy law was meant to bring ISPs into parity with telcos. Given that Internet communications often include substantially more sensitive data than phone records, that protection was crucial.
Probably, but it'd look similar to their attempt to scrap preexisting condition protections for everyone but includes an exception that protects the congress critters forced by law to also buy insurance from the marketplace.
Not to mention the increased traffic from "everyone driving" to those stores instead of a having a handful of vans dropping stuff off at a hundred points or so each each day.
Your ECON 101 course did not prepare you for the reality of the world around you. Supply and demand are both multi-dimensional and they may well never intersect in the real world. Or said another way, even if you were to offer the entire global GDP for the next 20 years, you will still not find someone able to supply you with the NCC-1701D.
Might I submit for your consideration that you "anonymous coward" might just be the kind of co-worker making people feel mistreated. Labeling people "snowflakes" doesn't exactly demonstrate empathy and solidarity.
Even "good natured ribbing" can be cruel when the humor isn't shared.
I'm certain you'll possess that opinion after I write the software that drives the robot replacing your job. Humans are and will be replaced by automation at ever increasing rates. Unless you're prepared to euthanize all of the "un-needed" people, something will have to give. Traditionally economic disenfranchisement begins with crime and eventually to war, death and destruction. Personally I'd prefer to avoid that.
Maybe, but probably not. There's a reason drugs and poverty tend to go hand-in-hand. Consider that most substance abuse starts out as a form of self-medication to relieve oneself of pain generally related to ones lot in life. Without the same stressors driving people to self-medicate fewer will.
Actually it's not as expensive as you believe. It's actually cheaper than the already existing social support services. UBI isn't a drag on the economy it's actually an enabler. So many very expensive societal problems run lock-step with poverty; crime, health, education, pollution, geopolitical stability, etc.. History is replete with examples of economic disenfranchisement being at the root of the fall of a great many empires. UBI removes the boot from the neck of the people.
Historically there has always been the possibility of emigrating elsewhere. Finding a place where you can settle to provide a subsistence level of survival for yourself or a family is a thing of the past. The Earth has been measured and claimed for a long time now, anywhere that you might think to go is going to have an owner already who is unlikely to just give it away.
Google is in a tight spot. If they rank things by purely objective algorithms, they'll be accused of leftist censorship. If they democratize things, there's at least a notion of openness with a hopeful prospect of balance and counterbalance to ensure moderate outcomes.
Anyone can gin up nonsense to fit a curve. That's what fake news largely is. The biggest error I see in most mainstream media is the assumption that details and context can be omitted. It is far easier to digest a simpleton falsehood compared to reality when the audience lacks the foundational information to understand it. You cannot communicate the complexities and nuance of reality in 30 second sound bites.
Is that the whole staring at and pontificating upon a pile of steaming dog poo and going "dude" a lot thing? I guess my take away of such things was that pot, LSD and their relatives simply in effect re-wired the perception of simple things; making them seem profound while in fact meriting nothing of the sort.
Complete with the extra $$$ to subsidize ESPN again. When are they going to get a freaking clue? Not everyone wants ESPN. Make the bloody network an add-on like HBO and give me a fair rate. Better still, make all the freaking networks (channels even) a la carte. Sell packages of points where each network/channel costs a certain number of points and let me pick what to fill it with.
Why couldn't they have turned Japanese on instead. I don't want to try learning another Asian language. Their learning curves seem to all start out with a 100ft vertical made of wet ice. At least I'm at the 80ft mark with Japanese...
Tell that to Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Crunchyroll, etc. al..
Professional sports leagues will continue to charge what ESPN is willing to pay. What cable co's have been long ignoring is that ESPN is an anchor that's just dragging them down. A very substantial component of the compulsory part of everyone's cable bill is basic access to ESPN. Sports fans might mind less, but everyone else is stuck with an excessively high subscription rate that subsidizes the cost of channels they rarely watch. It's the stuff cable cutters are born from. We're not talking about healthcare here. Many of us don't mind pulling up the disadvantaged when it comes to such matters. But, we surely do not view the consumption of sports entertainment that way. Pay for your own add-ons.
A bit fewer than half of the states have open primaries. Everywhere else, you can only vote within the party you registered. i.e. if you've registered Democrat you cannot vote in the Republican primaries.
So they place cameras in the dressing rooms for "security" personnel to make sure you don't thieve. Now, for a little $$$ you too can subscribe to the peep show.
Slashdot Mirror
The same reason I watch "let's play" videos of games that seem interesting on Steam before I buy them. If I'm going to drop money of any significance I want to make sure I'm better off than throwing it into a trash can. While I personally don't bother with the theaters and just do Netflix--principally for the reason just mentioned--I can easily see them wanting to make sure the $20+/person they're about to drop as a compelling reason to screen the movie aforehand.
Your audacious assertions aside, they must be doing something right since California is the 6th largest economy in the world and a net tax contributor. The states that are antipodes of California tend to skew towards absolute s**tholes, have the poorest, least educated citizens and receive the lion's share of federal supports.
Alas, our mayors like red light fines more than their citizens' well being. All you can expect are abrupt changes to an increasingly briefer yellow signal and perhaps increasing numbers of robots generating the citations. Strangely, you only have Obama to blame.
I can opt into Google if I consider them trustworthy. If where I live there's only evil choice A for ISP in my area (very common), or even if there's also an evil choice B, I still have no choice. You also ignore the confidence/protection codified law brings. While before the rule there was nothing prohibiting selling user data, there was also nothing giving permission to do so either. Lawyers make much of their money off such ambiguity.
Internet connectivity is no more optional than phone service is optional. This was one of the drivers behind common-carrier status for ISPs. It's illegal to buy/sell phone records without the record holder's permission or a writ from a court. The privacy law was meant to bring ISPs into parity with telcos. Given that Internet communications often include substantially more sensitive data than phone records, that protection was crucial.
Probably, but it'd look similar to their attempt to scrap preexisting condition protections for everyone but includes an exception that protects the congress critters forced by law to also buy insurance from the marketplace.
Not to mention the increased traffic from "everyone driving" to those stores instead of a having a handful of vans dropping stuff off at a hundred points or so each each day.
Your ECON 101 course did not prepare you for the reality of the world around you. Supply and demand are both multi-dimensional and they may well never intersect in the real world. Or said another way, even if you were to offer the entire global GDP for the next 20 years, you will still not find someone able to supply you with the NCC-1701D.
The work these immigrants do on the farm, on construction sites, etc. are jobs few Americans are willing to suffer at any age, at any wage.
Might I submit for your consideration that you "anonymous coward" might just be the kind of co-worker making people feel mistreated. Labeling people "snowflakes" doesn't exactly demonstrate empathy and solidarity.
Even "good natured ribbing" can be cruel when the humor isn't shared.
I'm certain you'll possess that opinion after I write the software that drives the robot replacing your job. Humans are and will be replaced by automation at ever increasing rates. Unless you're prepared to euthanize all of the "un-needed" people, something will have to give. Traditionally economic disenfranchisement begins with crime and eventually to war, death and destruction. Personally I'd prefer to avoid that.
Maybe, but probably not. There's a reason drugs and poverty tend to go hand-in-hand. Consider that most substance abuse starts out as a form of self-medication to relieve oneself of pain generally related to ones lot in life. Without the same stressors driving people to self-medicate fewer will.
Actually it's not as expensive as you believe. It's actually cheaper than the already existing social support services. UBI isn't a drag on the economy it's actually an enabler. So many very expensive societal problems run lock-step with poverty; crime, health, education, pollution, geopolitical stability, etc.. History is replete with examples of economic disenfranchisement being at the root of the fall of a great many empires. UBI removes the boot from the neck of the people.
Historically there has always been the possibility of emigrating elsewhere. Finding a place where you can settle to provide a subsistence level of survival for yourself or a family is a thing of the past. The Earth has been measured and claimed for a long time now, anywhere that you might think to go is going to have an owner already who is unlikely to just give it away.
So Mars, or Luna then?
Google is in a tight spot. If they rank things by purely objective algorithms, they'll be accused of leftist censorship. If they democratize things, there's at least a notion of openness with a hopeful prospect of balance and counterbalance to ensure moderate outcomes.
Only Donald can move to the center when it suits him. Everyone else must be intransigent and completely polarized.
Anyone can gin up nonsense to fit a curve. That's what fake news largely is. The biggest error I see in most mainstream media is the assumption that details and context can be omitted. It is far easier to digest a simpleton falsehood compared to reality when the audience lacks the foundational information to understand it. You cannot communicate the complexities and nuance of reality in 30 second sound bites.
Is that the whole staring at and pontificating upon a pile of steaming dog poo and going "dude" a lot thing? I guess my take away of such things was that pot, LSD and their relatives simply in effect re-wired the perception of simple things; making them seem profound while in fact meriting nothing of the sort.
Did you seriously put ESPN in the same basket as healthcare and emergency services?
Complete with the extra $$$ to subsidize ESPN again. When are they going to get a freaking clue? Not everyone wants ESPN. Make the bloody network an add-on like HBO and give me a fair rate. Better still, make all the freaking networks (channels even) a la carte. Sell packages of points where each network/channel costs a certain number of points and let me pick what to fill it with.
Why couldn't they have turned Japanese on instead. I don't want to try learning another Asian language. Their learning curves seem to all start out with a 100ft vertical made of wet ice. At least I'm at the 80ft mark with Japanese...
Tell that to Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Crunchyroll, etc. al..
Professional sports leagues will continue to charge what ESPN is willing to pay. What cable co's have been long ignoring is that ESPN is an anchor that's just dragging them down. A very substantial component of the compulsory part of everyone's cable bill is basic access to ESPN. Sports fans might mind less, but everyone else is stuck with an excessively high subscription rate that subsidizes the cost of channels they rarely watch. It's the stuff cable cutters are born from. We're not talking about healthcare here. Many of us don't mind pulling up the disadvantaged when it comes to such matters. But, we surely do not view the consumption of sports entertainment that way. Pay for your own add-ons.
A bit fewer than half of the states have open primaries. Everywhere else, you can only vote within the party you registered. i.e. if you've registered Democrat you cannot vote in the Republican primaries.
Except I think the bill also included language that prevented the FCC from having any further regulatory say in things.
I even suggest voting in the primary of the party you identify with the least.
I thought that was how Trump got elected.
So they place cameras in the dressing rooms for "security" personnel to make sure you don't thieve. Now, for a little $$$ you too can subscribe to the peep show.