"Recently the authors of Elements of Publishing..."

Typo in 6th word of article!

"In May 2021, licenses were obtained from Vie Vision Pictures Co. and Applause Entertainment Lt", so it's only contraband once someone else downloads it.

"To Save Lives, Issue Connected Vehicle Technology Waiver, NTSB Tells FCC"

-- was there a contest to create the most incomprehensible headline for this? It took me several tries to realize that "issue" is a verb here, and that a "connected technology waiver" is a thing. Extra points off for hiding it in a subordinate clause.

Each of the ones you list are, vaguely, cable replacements with dozens of channels each. Nobody would get more than one of those.

The problem is, the 20 channels you like are the 20 channels that everyone likes, and they wouldn't cost $100/500, they would cost $5 each, because that what they charge DirectTV. The "we have 500 channels for $100 so it's like it's 20 cents each" is marketing bullshit. (Hell, some of those 500 channels pay to be seen.)

Who, though, is the "you" who's being blamed here? The original (sort of) situation was that Netflix was the only streamer, and lots of studios sold their stuff to them for close to nothing. That's how Netflix got big, by having piles and piles of desirable content. Then one by one the studios realized they were leaving tons of money on the table, so over time they let those deals expire and started their own services.

So what is the proposal? Is it that Warner's, Paramount, Disney and others should have continued to sell Netflix their content for $1 when it's really worth $5? And the result, then, would be that Netflix is the only streamer in the industry, and everybody has to go through them, no matter what they offer to studios or charge consumers? And then, if your favorite streaming original is not on Netflix, there's a fair chance it wouldn't even have been made. So is the complaint that this didn't happen, and the industry is being justly punished for not presenting the world with a massive communications monopoly that would make the cable industry look like a mom-and-pop shop?

The story is wrong/misleading. The receipt listed no items, but it was not a "blank email". The Verge story has an image of the bad receipt.

The whole point here is that AT&T sold HBO (and all of Warner Brothers) to Discovery last year, so aside from selling it AT&T didn't ruin anything.

It's an industry (not electronics) term that's a few years old, and for some reason it means "on a fixed schedule". It includes cable, satellite services like DirectTV, and OTA. Incidentally, the quoted article's use of "totally free streaming channels that beam into any TV with an antenna" is wrong; that's not streaming.

What?

To clarify: there are a few Amtrak trains that come into Grand Central, and those seem to come from upstate NY. I think that's what you're referring to. The main Amtrak line runs from Boston to Penn Station in NYC, and then south to DC.

Supposedly the reason the French love Jerry Lewis is that his customary dubber is very good.

Median home selling price in Northgate is $780K

So there's a 1/2 chance that their house costs less than that.

Davies isn't back until next season; it's been Chibnall for these specials.

Jesus fuck. You are confusing the cost to create bitcoin with the value of it. It costs X for the electricity to mine the bitcoin, but the value from that electricity is zero; it's literally gone up in smoke.