The problem with that is that a lot of people are "hungry" because they are stupid. You don't really want them deciding this for themselves or worse yet on behalf of some minor that's a victim of piss poor parental management.

NOBODY desperately needs this particular pile of consumer goods. The sense of urgency here is entirely artificial.

Quite. People are ready to lynch Costco for applying some sort of standards to what they will buy and put on the shelf. They will reject things that Walmart will happily accept. This is by no means the first time. This is probably not the first pile of food to be "wasted" because Costco chose to err on the side of safety.

I can understand why they simply don't want to be associated with the listeria outbreak factory. It boggles my mind that ANY ONE here wants to push the issue.

Even if they've tested this stuff, I would still be suspicious of it just because of where it came from.

Yeah. Sure. Let corporations be free to run amok just because some peanut butter got wasted. Sure. Nevermind the fact that this peanut butter "tragedy" is just the tip of the iceberg here. Much more edible stuff gets destroyed for a variety of reasons.

There is simply no reason to act like a hysterical ninny about it.

Liberty is about being able to do what you want when you want. That necessarily includes doing things that your idiot neighbors might disapprove of. That includes buying and owning things that frighten them because they choose to remain ignorant and then show off that ignorance like a badge of honor.

Your contempt for the common man is plain and one wonders how soon it will migrate from property rights to voting rights.

It's really this fearful herd mentality that will undermine the usefulness of 3-D printing.

As others have said, people don't even cook for themselves anymore. Forget about printing out their own shoes.

On the other hand, the idea that an older version of Linux is "vulnerable" is just trollish hogwash.

> Exactly where can I get ala-carte TV programming (legally) by station and by show?

Ala-Carte TV programming? Where the HELL have you been? iTunes has offered this for a rather long time now. So has Amazon.

> Where can I get every single movie in existence including current theater releases (legally)?

You can't get this now. So you are just lamely moving the goalposts.

> Because I'm ENTITLED to movies and TV at a price I like!

Yes you are. It's called the free market.

As a matter of basic economic principles, the price of a product with highly elastic demand should be minimized. If this is not happening then something is probably broken somewhere.

> Why was that modded down? Those are valid points...

No they aren't. They're the usual Apple fanboy nonsense and cluelessness. As usual, the proudly ignorant are basing their FUD on gravely outdated information.

That's bound to happen when you frame your choices in terms of helplessness and extreme laziness.

> Because your bluray player is (most likely) a big piece of shit with a tiny cpu, a small amount of ram (for buffering), with a shitty network stack, so it can't deliver a great streaming performance, no matter how good the internet connection you have is.

A Roku isn't going to be any different in this regard. They are ALL puny underpowered ARM devices that can't handle any deviation from plan.

That's probably why the OP likes the idea of running a copy of XBMC on an old PC. An obsolete PC will still run circles around any ARM appliance once you decide to stray from the reservation.

> There also is no reason one service can't do the job. Why would I want to deal with multiple services when it is not technologically necessary?

You know what's not technologically necessary? An industry crippling monopoly. That's what's not technologically necessary.

There's no good reason to restrict yourself to a single provider for TV any more than you would restrict yourself to only one option for anything else.

The only other actual "gap" you mentioned is Sports and that is also evolving quickly online. As it is, it is mostly being held back by legacy contracts based on the old business model. Otherwise, the relevant players are quite ready to embrace the new model.

When Flavor Flav goes to Walmart to replace his ancient DVD player, what he will be presented with as a replacement will also have the built in capacity to stream from Netflix and Amazon.

Technology progresses. Prices drop. DVD players get displaced by BluRay players. BluRay players gain the ability to use streaming video services.

It's not 2007 anymore.

I don't think Netflix is anywhere near 100% satisfying but it comes pretty close. It's basically a replacement for 30 or so channels on cable that are dominated by re-runs.

However, I think the idea that this has to be some sort of one stop option is bogus and stupid. There's no good reason that multiple services can't do the job. We already have multiple channels in the old model.

Netflix + Amazon(PPV) together is a pretty complete solution.

> And the democrats only won it once between 1968 and 1992. What's your point?

It's not 1955 anymore, or even 1985. The same old rhetoric won't work because most of your base is dying of old age.

You can't even depend on the "white middle aged male" demographic anymore. Society has changed along with the demographics. You can't depend on crackers to get you elected.

Antagonizing EVERYONE else certainly is not a winning strategy.

Every time I go to buy a new car and have to deal with dealerships, I just wish that I could order what I want from the factory (or Amazon) and just pay MSRP.

Seriously. Dealers have gotten so bad that paying sticker price for exactly what you want is a better deal and less hassle sometimes.

> Clueless people believe all manner of ludicrous things.

Yes. You are a fine example.

There are many things that have been dragged under the rather thoroughly stretched and distorted umbrella of the ICC. Applying the ICC to this situation with Tesla would be far less of a stretch than some precedents that are over 100 years old.