Yeah, but that would not be instant clickbait news.

This means there will be less shakey-cam dumps on Pirate Bay and more quality transfers.

And "picture and streaming quality was shitty no matter what device I used" seemed pretty useful to me.

But that has to be bullshit. There is no way the amount of commercials that I view (skip over with Tivo) are worth $20 across all channels, let alone a single network.

CBS just thinks they are going to get to double-dip on pricing, and people will and for it. #1 network my ass. How many versions of the exact same CSI and NCIS can people put up with?

Also this falls into the "fair and balanced" fallacy. Fox news says one thing, MSNBC says the opposite, CNN is somewhere in the middle. So is it 50% chance of one being right? No.

Right, but you totally missed the point that GP was trying to make. Unless you have it set up to record every broadcast show all the time, how do you watch something that was on yesterday that you did set up to record beforehand.

In my case, I mess something because it rolled off of a queue, or the listings were inaccurate or some other garbage. Now I dont want to watch them out of order, so I end up letting them queue up while I wait for the one I missed to come on again. It doesn't, and items in the queue expire. Fuck it, I don't even bother watching the show anymore.

I wonder how many episodic arc shows fail because their timeslot got shifted, and a bunch of people missed an episode and simply gave up on the show.

When can television executives get it through their thick skulls that people want to be able to control what they watch and when they watch it and not have to jump through timeshifting hoops to do so?

Well, Kentucky using public funds for a religious theme park sounds like they are establishing a government religion in their state. Even if they were doing so unintentionally.

And, before you ask, I am against any tax-exempt status for any religious organization.

Ignoring them is what has enabled them to start taking over classrooms.

Yes, but to get out of the atmosphere you need to be going hypersonic speeds. Today it can only be done with rockets. In the 90's Aerospike egines was supposed to make hypersonic, suborbital and even SSTO flights possible. There is no commercially produced Aerospike engine yet.

This is always my argument about suborbital travel. It is not seriously faster than Concorde was, and Concorde was so hideously expensive to operate that even the elite could not keep it going. Until there is a revolution in air travel that enables hypersonic flight at current prices, suborbital travel will not become a thing.

And even if they do, they will still use less fuel than ship the same amount of cargo with smaller ships. Economies and ecologies of scale.

Maybe his car has a barnacles problem.

Nautical, not astronomical.

Unless you mean this space ship.

I would like to think that reasonable people knew what he meant, but there are a lot of crazy Fox News people out there. Still, they could have used a better term.

Same thing happens in the USA.

And these are usually the people that say we don't need national healthcare.