Not an unexpected proposal from a guy who already made his pile of money. Close the door behind him so nobody else gets to play by the same rules he did. I'd like to know how much money he would have had to pay in taxes if this were implemented when he was starting out.

And needs to be retired to the bit bucket. Need I say more?

That's exactly it. Most people who are in jail talk themselves into it. These guys were stupid.
That said, it's the black-hat hackers and criminals in general who don't engage in bravado are the ones you need to worry about.

Government bureaucracies already run about the same speed as a 300 baud dot matrix printer. They won't notice.

What I'm asking is whether or not these specific viewing groups are included in the headline numbers. If they are and you separate them then does the sales pitch of "We have hundreds of channels to watch" become total b.s.? What does that say about one group having to subsidize another? If you allowed for a la carte channel lineups, how many channels would suddenly find themselves in financial trouble and more interestingly, which ones?

But think about the amount of money spent to create and maintain 36 separate shopping channels and the amount of money spent to produce long infomercials and then think about the fact that there are enough people buying all this crap to not only pay for all of that but to turn a profit. Barnum was right.

So what if this is a ruse to get people to change passwords on the one day that security exploits are in place to capture the new passwords? Buck the trend and change them some other day or not at all.

Does this number include the duplicate HD channels, the spanish channels, the religious channels, or the pay-per-view channels? 36 shopping channels? Really? REALLY PEOPLE?!? AMAZON ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR YA?!?!?

Not so much with OSX. Might happen once a month or so if that. Linux, sure. Lots of components seems to get updated frequently. When I run Windows, it seems like every time I boot there is some sort of update. But not really my point. If Microsoft is going to brick the machine because an earlier update failed, that's bad.

And switched to OSX or Linux.

I'm surprised nobody has brought up color gamut yet. I have to roll my eyes whenever I see that Samsung vs Apple commercial "So your Galaxy has more pixels" So what? You could be shooting 8k video and it would still suck if the device were only 8-bit.

From a scientific point of view anyway. From Predator 2: "This doesn't correspond to anything on the periodic table." Really? I'd propose naming a new element Hollywoodium but I think that would introduce more problems than it would solve.

Closing accounts is one thing but there are a lot more insidious things going on. For example, my Chase Business account was recently changed without my approval such that I could not make outgoing international wire transfers unless I kept $50,000 in the account. That means that I have to tie up more cash that doesn't earn any interest in order to be able to purchase components from outside the country. That was the first straw. The next one was when my business banking rep called me to try to convince me to close out some of my credit cards that I keep on hand for times when I need to purchase a lot of inventory to handle a big order. Intentionally closing a credit card has negative impact on your credit rating. Why was the rep trying to get me to fall on my own sword? They said they were concerned about my exposure. WTF? I always pay the cards off every month. What exposure?

But there are other cases where some bureaucrat functionary decides to take "social justice" into their own hands. The firearms business has recently been targeted even though everything they are doing is perfectly legal and above board. In one instance, the bank rep told the company "We don't think you should be in this business." In another, a manufacturer went into a meeting with the bank they had been doing business with for years. The bank rep told them that they were going to take away their lines of credit. To the manufacturer's credit, they said "Fine. We're closing all our accounts now. Today. This minute."

Actually, you, sir (spelled with a c and a u) are the one who is ignorant. The Sheriff is the highest ranking authority of any county in the United States with law enforcement authority that supersedes every other agency including all federal agencies. Most people don't know that so I'm not surprised that you don't.

As a matter of fact, I am a licensed pilot and have been flying both full size aircraft and radio controlled aircraft for 30 years so don't presume to think that you know more than I do on the subject.

The reality is two-fold: First a foremost, the FAA has NO regulatory authority in these matters. They are simply using a "POLICY" written in 2007 to intimidate people. Read that word again: Policy. Policy is not regulation. The FAA knows they have no legal leg to stand on here otherwise they would have made a real regulation. Second: Sheriff's are elected officials and have to balance perception with pure law enforcement. Around here, there are too many people (read: growers and tinfoil hat types) who are worked into a lather about government surveillance.

The real question will be whether or not the FAA wants to risk the negative publicity when a lost 5-year old kid dies because they wouldn't allow a search & rescue UAV to be used. I personally would enjoy seeing Bill O'Reilly rip them a new one.

Right now, we're running into a road block with using UAVs for search & rescue with our local Sheriff. Given that his position is an elected one, he doesn't want to run the risk of alienating the electorate.