People who cannot think on a systemic level will never understand things like this. It is not an education thing; it is a problem solving thing. You either see the world as a set of systems, or you don't and can only focus on what is directly observable as consequence. You may be wasting your time.

It's pretty hilarious to watch you put me into boxes I don't belong. I could give two shits about NSA's databases and whether The Google is reading my email. I'm writing this from a Chromebook for chrissakes. I'm just pointing out that you are incredibly naive with regard to government abuses of power. But once you acknowledge that it does and will continue to happen, you still have the option of saying "who cares?"

> monopoly

You mean a monopoly where competitors can't deliver that kind of value to customers? How terrible.

> Any company willing to tell it's investors "screw you", because they are looking long-term instead of focusing only on quarterly gains, that's a company I'm willing to invest in.

They didn't have to tell investors "screw you". Their multiple is ridiculously high. Investors believe the story. This story is about some initial doubt that the long term investments pay off. Forgoing short term gain for long term benefit is a pretty typical thing (it's called CapEx), and investors get worried in times like the last 5 years when companies forgo CapEx in favor of share repurchasing and dividend increases, unless there truly is nothing better for the company to do with their cash.

Your caricature of "investors" shows a pretty naive view of what analysts and investors do. Of course they are not perfect, but outside of day traders, the kind of long term view that you imply can only be done if companies ignore investors, is very much what money managers, fund managers, analysts, and others look for. All you have left is mom and pop individual investors, who make up such a tiny percentage of the share count that companies don't care about their opinions (nor should they).

that's what happens when you don't let water cost what water costs. planting crops in arid regions wouldn't be viable if water were not subsidized. same with population explosion.

Um... have you heard of personalized learning applications?

Don't forget how you can't change anything about how the system works in a way that reduces the work of any particular role in the organization, or the relevant union will get very angry.

> We don't pay for people to go to college in this country

Um, what? Assuming you are here in the US, then you are simply wrong. The government pays a very large percentage of the cost of public school tuition by subsidizing in various ways, and it pays a smaller but still substantial percentage of private school tuition by subsidizing in fewer various ways. So, pretty much just like K-12, except that percentage isn't 100%.

> On the other hand, the way H-1B visa program works is that it provides "apprenticeships" for foreigners, and they got back to their own country, taking their skills with them, start up their own businesses in their own countries, create job opportunities for their own people, not Americans

We did not invest in this person for 16 years in the public school system. This is better than an American leaving the US after her frist job and starting up the company you mention that employs foreigners. So honestly I do not get what you are whining about.

That's great, but you cannot ignore that it reduces the wage you can command on average in the market. Wages are prices controlled by supply and demand, and fewer opportunities are open to you because you have no degree. Yes, you can say those employers are ignorant, but it doesn't really matter.

if we both think the other is too dumb to process simple English, then perhaps we have come to mutual agreement that this is a waste of time

that's what i figured

> You're trying to prove that one very specific abuse of this data (Guys sharing it with each-other) is inevitable.

No I didn't, you half-wit. All this time I assumed you were intelligent enough to process a simple point. It seems I have assumed too much.

Correct. This is called stealth price inflation.

This guy is so bothered by this, he came to slashdot and wrote up a story? Who cares. If you want to have the same experience, supplement with a redbox once every two months when you would actually be affected by this policy change. What is that, 50 cents per month more?

If you love physical disc netflix so much, why wouldn't you be supportive of this move that clearly makes physical disc processing viable for another x months? People who whine like this do not have top-of-mind that services you enjoy are provided by companies whose entire purpose is to be profitable, and as soon as a service offering you like results in less profit relative to alternatives requiring the same resources, your service offering goes away.

That is not netflix's fault. It's the content providers.