It's a running joke on the interwebs that the adverts on YouTube load faster than the actual content.
Running joke or not, that's the truth of it.
Yes, but I'm guaranteed to be able to pay my taxes, rent, buy food etc., with USD, <snip>
Ever tried buying Burger King, or even gasoline, with a $50 bill or higher? These notes are supposed to be legal tender for all debts, public and private, yet certain denominations are not accepted at certain establishments. I'm not suggesting that these places should or should not be allowed to accept/reject whatever denominations of currency they choose, but I'd say that the guarantee you speak of isn't as solid as one might believe.
The thing is, since Sony don't have a monopoly on air or water or anything, you can always just not buy Sony products if you're that offended by them.
A right which I practice daily!
Microcrud already said their console wouldn't play used games or borrowed games.
A quick google search only supplied that information as a rumor. Do you have a citation for that?
yeah, a real shame for retailers to think about their customers, and not just push whatever is best for their suppliers to the customers!
Really, though, why would a customer of that retailer voluntarily be burned by this tactic more than once? Other than stupidity, I can't think of a reason. Consumers buying products/services like this only serve to tell the retailers that the market will, in fact, tolerate this behavior. The solution is simple - don't tolerate that behavior and stop giving money to companies that are consumer hostile.
How many businesses do you know that do their own hosting?! If it was so cost-effective, they surely would be.
In my experience, it's not necessarily cost (directly) that drives businesses to host in the cloud, but guaranteed up-time. If you can't be absolutely sure that your client's site/data/whatever isn't going to go down for whatever reason, you outsource that hosting to a provider that can.
This isn't going to be the case hosting a private Minecraft server. Downtime isn't the end of the world or going to end up losing hundreds of thousands of dollars of potential profit.
Before there was one piece, and now there are two. The gallery is still in possession of its exhibit, so this is nothing like stealing an exhibit from them. It's more akin to creating new exhibits.
Using this analogy, the question then becomes "Is the original gallery entitled to the profits of the copy being displayed in a competing gallery?".
My opinion is that they are not. If it were illegal to make a copy of the exhibit, then the profits of displaying said illegal copy become criminal proceeds, which the original gallery should not be entitled to. If it's a legal copy, then it's not even an issue to begin with. Either way, the only just course of action that the original gallery should have is to stop the competing gallery from continuing to generate the criminal proceeds.
Dinosaurs aren't extinct. They've just learned to hide in the trees.