And additionally, whether you believe it's "right" or not, Netflix can only do what it does because there are copy protection mechanisms in place to ensure respect of the copyrights of the material they are displaying.

There might be a way to create an open source Netflix client that respects copyright, but it would be difficult (technologically, and perhaps legally depending on the license you're using), and it would be a hard sell to the copyright owners.

Plus, I mean, come on - Netflix streaming works on PS3, Xbox, wii, mac, windows, iphone, ipad, a number of set-top TV boxes like the Roku and the WD ones, several TVs with integrated instant watch, and several Blu-Ray players. They're trying to get as many eyes in front of their product as they can. It's not like they're forcing you into a small subset of products.

I voted for Boucher.

It wasn't enough.

Griffin's platform consists of "Anti-Gay, Anti-Abortion, Cut taxes, Reduce deficit", with no specifics.

As someone employed in the tech industry, and in Rick Boucher's district, I am worried about what we just did. A lot. I am a through-and-through Democrat, and I would have voted for someone with Boucher's views on technology if they had been a Tea Partier, or a Silver Fox party member, or a Green, or a Socialist, or an anarchist.

...So vote republican.

What? Borrowing from where?

You do realize that every government that has ever existed in the history of the world* has taxed and spent money, right? That's what governments do. You pay the government money, and the government provides stability, prosperity, services, etc.

Have you ever seen a parabola? It levels out at the bottom before it starts going up again. Economies do not turn on a dime; all the money being spent to "stabilize" is not for stability, it's an investment in growth! When you're on a downward trajectory, and you try to fix it (by investing money), the first step is leveling out. So, yeah, "barely keep things stable" is exactly what's happened, on our way to renewed growth.

Unemployment is a lagging indicator. Just a month or two ago, there was an economic report that said that productivity in the American workforce has gone down, and that's a GOOD THING. It means that businesses are recovering, revenues are up, and the workers that are left after the layoffs of the previous 5 years have reached their maximum productivity, and that the businesses have done everything they can with their current workforce and are going to have to start hiring again to keep up with demand.

When the economy is in the shitter is the time to deficit spend. The time to deficit spend is not when the government is running a surplus and on the right track (Bush II).
The Republicans' deficit spending was spent on worthless giveaways.
The Democrats' deficit spending is trying to get us out of the mess.
Saying it's the same at all is like looking at a flooded basement, and saying "now is not the time to hire a plumber and pay for him with your credit card, now is the time to save!", right after you just used the credit card to put gold fixtures and doorknobs on everything.

* Ok, ok, Alexander the Great didn't tax Macedonian citizens. He supported his government by conquest. His government could be more accurately described as "pillage and spend".

Stop that.

NOTHING from "Obamacare" has gone into effect yet. Health insurance premiums have been rising at 4x the rate of inflation for a decade or more now. This year's health insurance premium rates were almost certainly calculated before the bill was passed.

Also, calling it "Obamacare" is a big red flag saying "Hi, I am repeating tea party talking points without any capacity for original thought".

That's not true; the mandate PROTECTS insurance companies.

If insurance companies can't deny coverage based on pre-existing problems, AND there's no mandate to have insurance, what's to stop people from waiting until they're sick to have insurance?

The entire idea of insurance is that you continually pay into it, and the risk is shared over many people, sick and well. Without the shared risk, only the sick will pay into it, and it quickly goes bankrupt.

Put down the partisan talking points for a second and think about it.

According to several of my (very out) gay friends, putting your sexuality on facebook tends to lend its self to a lot of random messages from people who want to meet up at truck stops.

No joke.

I have a friend who sold all his worldly possessions, moved back in with his girlfriends' parents, and saved for 18 months to get on a plane and hop around southeast asia for a year. That hasn't gotten bored, from what I understand.

That's funny.

Here in America, my wife is in Veterinary School. When she gets out, we'll be $140,000 in debt from her student loans. She's currently in her 4th and final year, doing rotations. So, it's essentially a job, except it's one that she leaves the house at 5:30 AM and comes home at 10:00PM (on a good day) to collapse and be asleep by 11:00pm so she can wake up and do it all over again.

Depending on which discipline block she's on, she may have less work (i.e. 7am to 6pm for dermatology or ultrasound), or she may have more work (i.e. small animal emergency surgery, like she's on now, where she didn't come home last night and likely will work 6am yesterday through 10pm today). They get 5 days off for the entire year, plus one of the three week blocks they can have off (there are 16 3-week blocks, and they have to do 15 of them). They're supposed to be doing interviews / taking their boards during that off block, but I would imagine most of them spend it sleeping and/or drunk; or in our case, reintroducing herself to our 6 year old kid that she sees an hour or two a week.

Often she comes home only to have to go into the vet school 2-4 times a day to do something menial, like walk one of the dogs or clean a cage of a patient - you know, things that they could hire a $25,000/yr assistant to do, but don't because they have students.

And for this? She pays to do the work. Probably not terribly far off from what a lot of people actually get paid to do work - about $35,000/yr.

Expected salary on graduation? About $60,000/yr.

Doesn't being tidally locked with the star make it more like the planet Crematoria from the Chronicles of Riddick? I.e. extremely hot / boiling lava / etc on one side, and hundreds below zero on the other?

Doesn't sound that hospitable...

Boy... Of course, you know none of that stuff is free, right? It's all paid for with taxes. So, by that definition:

* Free Healthcare for at least some, including all elderly and poor? Check.
* Free Retirement for the Elderly? Check.
* Free and/or greatly subsidized Food/Housing for the Poor? Check.
* Free school, plus subsidized college for the people? Check.
* Not free, but government-subsidized "locally-built cars" for everyone, even the poor?

Man, the USA looks pretty socialist.

Actually, this is the 2nd of your posts I've replied to, and I'm starting to wonder if you're either trolling or being sarcastic. It's either that, or you're a Tea Party true believer; the fact that I can't tell is a troubling sign of the political weather.

Tea Partiers: The vuvuzelas of socio-political discourse.

[citation needed]

Pending your above [citation needed], clearly two wrongs make a right, so you're now allowed to do it? Is that how that works?

Incorrect.

Fascists support a "third position" in economic policy, which they believe superior to both the rampant individualism of laissez-faire capitalism and the severe control of state socialism.[27][28] Italian Fascism and most other fascist movements promote a corporatist economy whereby, in theory, representatives of capital and labour interest groups work together within sectoral corporations to create both harmonious labour relations and maximization of production that would serve the national interest.[29] However other fascist movements and ideologies, such as Nazism, did not utilize this form of economy.[29]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism

In a socialist economic system, production is carried out by a free association of workers to directly maximise use-values (instead of indirectly producing use-value through maximising exchange-values), through coordinated planning of investment decisions, distribution of surplus, and the means of production. Socialism is a set of social and economic arrangements based on a post-monetary system of calculation, such as labour time, energy units or calculation-in-kind; at least for the factors of production.[4] Socialists advocate a method of compensation based on individual merit or the amount of labour one contributes to society.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

[citation needed]

• Franco was a member of the Falange Española de las Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional Sindicalista (http://bit.ly/avLQU4)

• Mussolini was a member of the National Fascist Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Fascist_Party)

• Hitler was a member of the Nationalsozialisten (National Socialists) party, as in "National Socialists", which is in no way associated with actual socialism. "National Socialist" and "Socialist" are categorically different:

Nazism is a politically syncretic variety of fascism, which incorporates policies, tactics and philosophic tenets from left and right-wing politics. Italian fascism and German Nazism reject liberalism, democracy and Marxism.[67] Usually supported by the far right (military, business, Church), fascism is historically anti-communist, anti-conservative and anti-parliamentary.[68] The Nazis' rise to power was assisted by the Fascist government of Italy that began to financially subsidize the Nazi party in 1928.[69]

• The former USSR was lead by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which was ACTUALLY a socialist state; it was, however, in no way fascist. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union)

If I am willing to consider that "No" and "Not all" are close-ish, this is the first thing you've said that borders on being marginally correct.

Just ignore him, he's another one of those "Both sides are bad! (vote republican)" guys.

Myself, I prefer shady urls.

http://www.shadyurl.com/

http://slashdot.org/
becomes
http://5z8.info/aryanbr0ther00d_l9e5b_malicious-cookie

Maybe, but... that person cannot use the software in the box, because they did not acquire a legal license from the licensee. Only you did.

How in the blue hell do you figure that?

Best buy gets the software from a distributor. Best buy pays for the software. They now own that copy. They don't open it, or agree to the EULA. They sell it to Timmy Consumer. Timmy Consumer now owns that copy. He can: 1.) open it and agree to the EULA, in which case you may have a point; or he can 2.) Sell it to someone else without agreeing to the EULA, in which case there is no expectation of a contract between Timmy and the Software Maker.