I've only just converted, but I'm glad to see other people like you having success in ditching the > $100 (mine was nearly $140 from DirecTV for service on 3 TVs, and that didn't even include any premium channels). I decided TV is just not worth it. I liked skipping commercials with the DVR, but with Hulu's commercial free option, that hasn't been a problem. There are certainly drawbacks and caveats, and there are holes in the programming that I need to make up for in other ways (like you with the sports package), but still... Amazon Prime, Netflix, Hulu+ no commercials... compared to over $1500 year? For TV?
I'm a recent convert, and pay the extra $4 for commercial free, and am thinking along the same lines. I will miss my DVR - we'd save up entire seasons of shows and binge watch when we had the time. But if you can watch any show any time, you don't really need a DVR... and especially if there are no commercials (the biggest benefit to DVR, IMO, is skipping commercials). The only problem is every show has this or that restrictions... only the most recent 5 being the most common, with the show not being available until the day after it aired (some shows we look forward to we wouldn't binge watch, we'd just watch shortly after it started). You need to keep track of which shows you can't let go too long without watching, or risk missing them. The other thing is that if I had to reduce what I watched to the five shows on TV that I liked the best, four of them would be on AMC, and none of them, as far as I can tell, on Hulu. But so far I'm OK with what we got (watched the last Preacher from the AMC app... but with commercials).
So there are definitely drawbacks.... but going from what I was paying to $12 is great. There's a few holes in the programming that I'm trying to work around, so I will end up paying more, but nothing like the nearly $140 I was paying for TV service before.... it's just TV, it's not worth that.
I just signed up for Hulu+ commercial free. $12 compared to the nearly $140/month I was paying for DirecTV (don't get me wrong, I liked DirecTV's service a lot, but that's a lot of money for watching TV). I've had it less than a week, but we've been enjoying commercial free since we haven't watched any of the exceptions, but even the exceptions are supposed to only show commercials on the front/back end and not interrupt the program in the middle... the better question is who wouldn't pay the extra $4 to get commercial free?
I agree - especially when what most people signed on for was "unlimited," and especially if someone signed a long term (year or more) contract that the provider unilaterally changed after the fact. But really, instead of going the route of more government regulation, they should be attacking providers for dividing up territory to keep monopolies. If we had more competition, we'd have better prices and service. I would dearly love to dump Comcast, but now I'm getting 90Mbs, and nobody else in my area comes close.
It's bad enough on Facebook, but it's a lot more heinous on mainstream news sites (like CNN.com). A respectable news site has no business exposing their readers to that kind of s%!t. (don't hassle me about calling CNN respectable, they all do it).
Yeah, well... to each his own, I guess. I was looking into a MacBook because of form factor and the availability of discrete Nvidia graphics; a lot of co-workers referred to the MacBook as "the best Windows laptop." But now they use ATI, and my graphics software (which runs on Windows, so I don't have much of a choice) is certified for Nvidia.
At the same time, my experience with OS X was not pleasant. I was offered a Mac Mini at work a few years ago and thought "why not?" I really did not like the UI; all the tweak-able things I was accustomed to under Linux were missing, you had to add on software to do simple things (like mouse acceleration) and snapping windows; I like being able to stretch a windows from any side or corner. I'm not saying OS X isn't good, but it was more frustrating than the Windows UI to tailor to what I wanted. I gave it a good try, too - I will often accept changing the way I do things if I can get accustomed to it if there are benefits overall, and I tried it out for about a month before deciding I didn't like it.
When the government can take your home using eminent domain for the purposes of getting more tax dollars from private businesses, I don't see why it's an issue of using eminent domain for how it was actually intended.
I've lived in NY, Nevada (and drove to CA a number of times), GA, FL, have driven across country a number of times, and generally put around 20k miles on my car every year.... trust me, people, drivers are terrible everywhere. They don't follow the rules/mores of the road, slower traffic doesn't keep right, everywhere you go there might be the occasional driver that lets someone signaling in without causing a problem, but you're just as likely (maybe more) to get a douchebag who closes up the gap; people don't signal, some people driving below the limit are in one of the left lanes, while copious numbers of speeders are in the right (probably because of the former), people wait until the last second to move over from the left to their very busy exit on the right, causing lane slowdowns every step of the way (and cumulatively that's what causes slow-and-go and stop-and-go traffic at a single exit on a six or seven lane highway). People purposely cause gridlock because they don't want to wait for the next cycle, they're not paying attention when the light turns green (causing any number of people to miss it in heavy traffic).
Some of these things are the results of others - people don't signal because, when they do, people close the gap. Then they get in the habit of just not signaling. If you think people should signal, you should always let them in when they do.... encourage good behaviors, don't punish them.
People go fast in the right lanes because others are going slow in the left lanes. People cut in lines because there are far too many people who don't pay attention and make the lines go slower (and leave large gaps in front of them, encouraging the bad behavior). The worse thing I see, by far, only because it's so obvious and so selfish are the people causing gridlock - but even then there are the cases where, if you don't, you might not ever be able to go (at least until the end of rush hour).
Let's face it - we've created our own bad traffic problems, and while law enforcement might help (I've never seen anyone get a ticket for causing gridlock or passing on the right, or going slow in the left lanes), people are generally anti-law enforcement because they might enforce other laws they don't want to get a ticket for (like speeding). And you will never get everyone on the same page about how to drive - and all it takes is one in 500 on a busy roadway (like city interstates during rush hour) to royally screw up traffic, causing people to have to go around and generally fubarring things. That's all it takes, but the actual number of douchebags is more like 1 in 10.
Yes, whenever I've gotten some new piece of equipment, I might speedtest to see what, if any, improvement I got. But I've used it far more times when internet speed seemed really slow to see if the problem was on my end or not.
Why are people rating this funny? I was getting 25Mbs with my Comcast wired connection. While waiting in a parking lot one day, I decided to speed test my T-Mobile connection and got 90Mbs. I've since upgraded my modem with Comcast, but the point remains that I was getting faster data through my cell service than my wired connection (and for a lot less money, although the high speed data limit is 1/100th of what Comcast's is).
Definitely agree with that. I still don't see the point of this article... people look at the specs when they buy, and if they are happy with it, then they can choose to buy it. It's partly why I've never gotten an Apple, and now when people say they hold their value better, we can say it's because unlike every other computer manufacturer that lowers prices over time, the four year old "new" Apples cost the same.... but then that value is just an illusion. Component-wise, it's a rip off.
My Dell XPS has a 4K screen and aluminum case, and better specs (CPU/RAM/SSD) than just about any MacBook at a comparable cost on the high end.... it even has a lightening port.
I was actually looking for a MacBook for the size, great reviews, and the fact that you could get a discreet Nvidia graphics processor, which is what all my professional graphics software are certified for (I do use some of it on ATI with success, but they aren't officially supported). A number of people at work referred to the MacBook as the best Windows laptop. Unfortunately, I have to laugh at this article because shortly before I was given a budget for a new laptop at work, Apple switched to ATI. I ended up with a Dell XPS.
i watched "Spy" the other day, and while it had it's (far too) occasional moments, it reminded me why I don't like Melissa McCarthy. I honestly didn't like Robin Williams way back when for similar reasons - just keep spewing nonsense until somebody laughs and call it comedy. It wasn't until he did drama that I really respected him. I don't think McCarthy is capable.
Yes - there are a lot of critics of the movie that actually ARE misogynists (as evidenced by the overt criticism of the male cast being replaced by women), but that doesn't mean that every critic is a misogynist... in my post above, I mentioned Barack Obama, too - certainly a lot of critics of Barack Obama are clearly racists - but most people disagreeing with policy are often labeled racists, despite the fact that there was nothing racist about the criticism. Let's face it, people are falling back on their "protected status" as a first line defense against any criticism. It happens. Too much. Not always, but too much.
Which brings us back to the SJW post a few posts back.... the only reason you wouldn't like the new Ghostbusters can only be misogyny, just like the only reason you wouldn't like Barack Obama can only be racism.
Two factor authentication, like RSA secure ID, is a great idea (IMO). Then you have only one password to remember, but need your RSA device, too. We do this where I work. The problem is that, while that gets me through the firewall, internally it's just AD - so when I log in remotely, I need both RSA with prepended key that I supplied, but also my "normal" password - that still needs to be changed every 90 days.
I had an algorithm for unique passwords for different sites that needed them that combined things about the company, myself, and various other criteria that meant I could always deduce what my password was if I didn't outright remember it. The passwords were relatively long and complicated, mixing upper/lower, numbers, and some punctuation, and were at least 10 characters long. Then we started in with the "must change your password every x days." So I revamped my algorithm to include something timely. I might take a few tries to get a password I didn't outright remember, but it would work. But then we started getting really unbelievable requirements for passwords... the number of special characters went up, some passwords were required to be stupidly long, so I adapted again... and then encountered a sight that had all these special character requirements but wouldn't let you have a password more than 8 characters. Some actually complained about the special characters I used. It's just getting kind of stupid. Unless you want to throw all your eggs in one basked (like using facebook login for everything), then you end up with dozens of separate accounts and passwords for all your financial stuff, slashdot, every game you play, every service, every forum.
I often have to work in a room with a lot of electronic devices - the room is central to the building (no windows) with only one door. If the door is open, I get a bar... otherwise I get nothing. I'll be working for hours, and then someone will come in and I suddenly get a bunch of texts. It's actually kind of nice.
I actually have the least compatibility issues with Firefox. Actually, it's one thing in particular (Pulse connect on Linux) that won't launch on Chrome. I haven't had any other problems with Firefox, and haven't even noticed any speed issues, so it's actually my go-to browser right now. Of course YMMV - I don't do a whole lot of non-basic web browsing.
Slashdot Mirror
I've only just converted, but I'm glad to see other people like you having success in ditching the > $100 (mine was nearly $140 from DirecTV for service on 3 TVs, and that didn't even include any premium channels). I decided TV is just not worth it. I liked skipping commercials with the DVR, but with Hulu's commercial free option, that hasn't been a problem. There are certainly drawbacks and caveats, and there are holes in the programming that I need to make up for in other ways (like you with the sports package), but still... Amazon Prime, Netflix, Hulu+ no commercials... compared to over $1500 year? For TV?
I'm a recent convert, and pay the extra $4 for commercial free, and am thinking along the same lines. I will miss my DVR - we'd save up entire seasons of shows and binge watch when we had the time. But if you can watch any show any time, you don't really need a DVR... and especially if there are no commercials (the biggest benefit to DVR, IMO, is skipping commercials). The only problem is every show has this or that restrictions... only the most recent 5 being the most common, with the show not being available until the day after it aired (some shows we look forward to we wouldn't binge watch, we'd just watch shortly after it started). You need to keep track of which shows you can't let go too long without watching, or risk missing them. The other thing is that if I had to reduce what I watched to the five shows on TV that I liked the best, four of them would be on AMC, and none of them, as far as I can tell, on Hulu. But so far I'm OK with what we got (watched the last Preacher from the AMC app... but with commercials).
So there are definitely drawbacks.... but going from what I was paying to $12 is great. There's a few holes in the programming that I'm trying to work around, so I will end up paying more, but nothing like the nearly $140 I was paying for TV service before.... it's just TV, it's not worth that.
I just signed up for Hulu+ commercial free. $12 compared to the nearly $140/month I was paying for DirecTV (don't get me wrong, I liked DirecTV's service a lot, but that's a lot of money for watching TV). I've had it less than a week, but we've been enjoying commercial free since we haven't watched any of the exceptions, but even the exceptions are supposed to only show commercials on the front/back end and not interrupt the program in the middle... the better question is who wouldn't pay the extra $4 to get commercial free?
Appear less frequently = buried? And it sounds like it's only a problem if that's all you do.
Who said you weren't allowed?
I agree - especially when what most people signed on for was "unlimited," and especially if someone signed a long term (year or more) contract that the provider unilaterally changed after the fact. But really, instead of going the route of more government regulation, they should be attacking providers for dividing up territory to keep monopolies. If we had more competition, we'd have better prices and service. I would dearly love to dump Comcast, but now I'm getting 90Mbs, and nobody else in my area comes close.
It's bad enough on Facebook, but it's a lot more heinous on mainstream news sites (like CNN.com). A respectable news site has no business exposing their readers to that kind of s%!t. (don't hassle me about calling CNN respectable, they all do it).
Yeah, well... to each his own, I guess. I was looking into a MacBook because of form factor and the availability of discrete Nvidia graphics; a lot of co-workers referred to the MacBook as "the best Windows laptop." But now they use ATI, and my graphics software (which runs on Windows, so I don't have much of a choice) is certified for Nvidia.
At the same time, my experience with OS X was not pleasant. I was offered a Mac Mini at work a few years ago and thought "why not?" I really did not like the UI; all the tweak-able things I was accustomed to under Linux were missing, you had to add on software to do simple things (like mouse acceleration) and snapping windows; I like being able to stretch a windows from any side or corner. I'm not saying OS X isn't good, but it was more frustrating than the Windows UI to tailor to what I wanted. I gave it a good try, too - I will often accept changing the way I do things if I can get accustomed to it if there are benefits overall, and I tried it out for about a month before deciding I didn't like it.
When the government can take your home using eminent domain for the purposes of getting more tax dollars from private businesses, I don't see why it's an issue of using eminent domain for how it was actually intended.
I've lived in NY, Nevada (and drove to CA a number of times), GA, FL, have driven across country a number of times, and generally put around 20k miles on my car every year.... trust me, people, drivers are terrible everywhere. They don't follow the rules/mores of the road, slower traffic doesn't keep right, everywhere you go there might be the occasional driver that lets someone signaling in without causing a problem, but you're just as likely (maybe more) to get a douchebag who closes up the gap; people don't signal, some people driving below the limit are in one of the left lanes, while copious numbers of speeders are in the right (probably because of the former), people wait until the last second to move over from the left to their very busy exit on the right, causing lane slowdowns every step of the way (and cumulatively that's what causes slow-and-go and stop-and-go traffic at a single exit on a six or seven lane highway). People purposely cause gridlock because they don't want to wait for the next cycle, they're not paying attention when the light turns green (causing any number of people to miss it in heavy traffic).
Some of these things are the results of others - people don't signal because, when they do, people close the gap. Then they get in the habit of just not signaling. If you think people should signal, you should always let them in when they do.... encourage good behaviors, don't punish them.
People go fast in the right lanes because others are going slow in the left lanes. People cut in lines because there are far too many people who don't pay attention and make the lines go slower (and leave large gaps in front of them, encouraging the bad behavior). The worse thing I see, by far, only because it's so obvious and so selfish are the people causing gridlock - but even then there are the cases where, if you don't, you might not ever be able to go (at least until the end of rush hour).
Let's face it - we've created our own bad traffic problems, and while law enforcement might help (I've never seen anyone get a ticket for causing gridlock or passing on the right, or going slow in the left lanes), people are generally anti-law enforcement because they might enforce other laws they don't want to get a ticket for (like speeding). And you will never get everyone on the same page about how to drive - and all it takes is one in 500 on a busy roadway (like city interstates during rush hour) to royally screw up traffic, causing people to have to go around and generally fubarring things. That's all it takes, but the actual number of douchebags is more like 1 in 10.
What could possibly go wrong?
Yes, whenever I've gotten some new piece of equipment, I might speedtest to see what, if any, improvement I got. But I've used it far more times when internet speed seemed really slow to see if the problem was on my end or not.
Why are people rating this funny? I was getting 25Mbs with my Comcast wired connection. While waiting in a parking lot one day, I decided to speed test my T-Mobile connection and got 90Mbs. I've since upgraded my modem with Comcast, but the point remains that I was getting faster data through my cell service than my wired connection (and for a lot less money, although the high speed data limit is 1/100th of what Comcast's is).
Plus 1 for T-Mobile.... my company gave us an extra day of per diem to cover international rates for our cell phones.... free money for me.
Definitely agree with that. I still don't see the point of this article... people look at the specs when they buy, and if they are happy with it, then they can choose to buy it. It's partly why I've never gotten an Apple, and now when people say they hold their value better, we can say it's because unlike every other computer manufacturer that lowers prices over time, the four year old "new" Apples cost the same.... but then that value is just an illusion. Component-wise, it's a rip off.
My Dell XPS has a 4K screen and aluminum case, and better specs (CPU/RAM/SSD) than just about any MacBook at a comparable cost on the high end.... it even has a lightening port.
I was actually looking for a MacBook for the size, great reviews, and the fact that you could get a discreet Nvidia graphics processor, which is what all my professional graphics software are certified for (I do use some of it on ATI with success, but they aren't officially supported). A number of people at work referred to the MacBook as the best Windows laptop. Unfortunately, I have to laugh at this article because shortly before I was given a budget for a new laptop at work, Apple switched to ATI. I ended up with a Dell XPS.
It would be if there was already an American version of House of Cards.
i watched "Spy" the other day, and while it had it's (far too) occasional moments, it reminded me why I don't like Melissa McCarthy. I honestly didn't like Robin Williams way back when for similar reasons - just keep spewing nonsense until somebody laughs and call it comedy. It wasn't until he did drama that I really respected him. I don't think McCarthy is capable.
Yes - there are a lot of critics of the movie that actually ARE misogynists (as evidenced by the overt criticism of the male cast being replaced by women), but that doesn't mean that every critic is a misogynist... in my post above, I mentioned Barack Obama, too - certainly a lot of critics of Barack Obama are clearly racists - but most people disagreeing with policy are often labeled racists, despite the fact that there was nothing racist about the criticism. Let's face it, people are falling back on their "protected status" as a first line defense against any criticism. It happens. Too much. Not always, but too much.
Which brings us back to the SJW post a few posts back.... the only reason you wouldn't like the new Ghostbusters can only be misogyny, just like the only reason you wouldn't like Barack Obama can only be racism.
Two factor authentication, like RSA secure ID, is a great idea (IMO). Then you have only one password to remember, but need your RSA device, too. We do this where I work. The problem is that, while that gets me through the firewall, internally it's just AD - so when I log in remotely, I need both RSA with prepended key that I supplied, but also my "normal" password - that still needs to be changed every 90 days.
I had an algorithm for unique passwords for different sites that needed them that combined things about the company, myself, and various other criteria that meant I could always deduce what my password was if I didn't outright remember it. The passwords were relatively long and complicated, mixing upper/lower, numbers, and some punctuation, and were at least 10 characters long. Then we started in with the "must change your password every x days." So I revamped my algorithm to include something timely. I might take a few tries to get a password I didn't outright remember, but it would work. But then we started getting really unbelievable requirements for passwords... the number of special characters went up, some passwords were required to be stupidly long, so I adapted again... and then encountered a sight that had all these special character requirements but wouldn't let you have a password more than 8 characters. Some actually complained about the special characters I used. It's just getting kind of stupid. Unless you want to throw all your eggs in one basked (like using facebook login for everything), then you end up with dozens of separate accounts and passwords for all your financial stuff, slashdot, every game you play, every service, every forum.
Shouldn't we be using passphrases by now?
I often have to work in a room with a lot of electronic devices - the room is central to the building (no windows) with only one door. If the door is open, I get a bar... otherwise I get nothing. I'll be working for hours, and then someone will come in and I suddenly get a bunch of texts. It's actually kind of nice.
I actually have the least compatibility issues with Firefox. Actually, it's one thing in particular (Pulse connect on Linux) that won't launch on Chrome. I haven't had any other problems with Firefox, and haven't even noticed any speed issues, so it's actually my go-to browser right now. Of course YMMV - I don't do a whole lot of non-basic web browsing.