Exactly.

But I would most people to continue paying for cable tv. Someone has to foot the bill, making tv shows and content is expensive.

But if, say, Netflix and similar services were to ever to become the "norm" and cable tv to begin to erode, I think the undesirable qualities of cable TV would find their way into Netflix and similar services.

I don't want streaming to be loaded up with advertising, as an example. But cable tv is the main venue for advertising today and there are tens of billions of dollars in it.

The articles says it will orbit the Earth eventually.

I'm ahead of curve, as always!

I plan to be visiting Earth's second moon ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3... ) and am concerned about this while making travel arrangements. Please advise.

"So please, do enlighten all of us who clearly don't have your intimate knowledge of IP networking as to how we can send and receive data without sharing our IP address."

A centralized server.

Which is why you have no clue what my IP address is.

Have at it. Do it from sunrise to sunset.

And my point with be correct the entire time while you do it, regardless of whether or not you think attacking the conveyor of a correct and valid idea has merit.

And when your communications are routed through your DSL, Cable or Phone provider?

You seem to operate from the idea that communications network is separate from corporate control or government observation. But it isn't.

You can wish it were. It does not make it so.

Hence, your ideas aren't from a position of experience like you wish to believe, but rather inexperience. Which is my point.

I hope you learned something today.

Today you don't understand, but perhaps given enough time you might accumulate the wisdom to understand my point.

If you think the flaw in the system is the central, good for you.

You will also be ignorant of the history of the internet, but that's ok and with enough time you'll either see my point or not.

But to relate to what you understand today, I would say that doesn't anonymity contribute to a healthy internet --- even semi-anonmymity as you might understand it with what you understand --- and your idea is that this would discarded because of Boogeyman (NSA or Russians or whatever).

We have been down that road before, it didn't work. And it is okay if you don't know enough about the past to know these past attempts failed, that's just part of the learning experience.

A server in the middle that acts as a central point.

I get what you are saying, but exposing IP addresses to 3rd parties isn't typically desirable.

Case in point, I don't have your IP address. And you don't have mine.

Sure email works like that (although possibly less so in current era with gmail and such, then again maybe not), but many services don't. Sure, the service provider --- the middleman --- has access to that, but the other users don't.

A solution to a problem isn't necessarily a knee-jerk opposite solution (centralized vs. decentralized) but often some variation of an existing successful model that is slightly flawed, correcting *ONLY* the part that is flawed, not the parts of the service infrastructure that work well.

It is a legitimate concern. Mocking it doesn't allay the concern.

Well phrased.

" There are probably more habitable moons around those gas giants than all the other kinds of planets put together."

Gas giants have massive radiation belts caused by their magnetosphere. Moons around a gas giant can't have life as we know it. Even going anywhere near Jupiter's space would expose an astronaut to an intense dose of radiation.

Quote: "If astronauts were able to approach the planet as close as the Voyager 1 spacecraft did, they would receive a dose of 400,000 rads, or roughly 1,000 times the lethal dose for humans." https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/s...

Understandably you misjudged what I was saying because I phrased it poorly.

Microsoft Office is a form of peer-pressure where people with little technical knowledge have "heard of it".

This social peer-pressure, in itself, does not make Microsoft Office a better or worse product. And the social peer-pressure does not open solutions a better or worse product.

But makes it a known product. (Unfortunately, the open solutions are not on par with MS Office, for all of MS Office's flaws).

I'm sort of kidding, but at the same time Microsoft actively maintains their bloatware and has profit as a motivation to do so.

And "normal people" are used to it because as sheep, they are familiar with the product.

On the other hand, the various open solutions are ok on a screen shot level and for very elementary tasks, but unfortunately when you go to do complicated things, you frequently find the Microsoft product has a feature to handle it and the open solution either doesn't or it is rather messy.

Which is a shame. Firefox gets $$$ (from Google) and can afford to polish up, but the open source office solutions --- while nice --- are not polished to such a level.

>one hour of working your social network looking for a referral is equivalent to roughly 12 hours of submitting web-based job applications

You have a very well phrased expression there. Communicates very effectively!

There is no relationship between an online job application and getting a job.

Online job applications are neglected because no one needs 10,000 online forms filled out for 1 job.