what about the Page Three Girl
That is very important news!
The last computer I homebuilt ran Windows 3.1
It had an Intel 80486 DX-2 processor and, for that time, lots of RAM and a pretty good graphics co-processor. It couldn't hold a candle to what I have now. But Apple makes good computers and my current one is the fastest Cheese Grater Apple made.
well I got skooled here. I did not know that AdBlock did block Google Text ads. The versions I have pass them by default.
But they are not fraudulent. The ones that are listed at the top of search, Google places on a yellow background, so you know that they are not natural search. The rest are to the right of natural search and are clearly labeled. Furthermore, Google examines all landing pages from these ads and makes certain that the stuff in the ads relates to the stuff on those pages. If it doesn't, Google quits showing the ads.
I do know this because I do work with clients and try to get the most out of their non-display advertisements. I do not think what my clients are doing is fraudulent. Additionally, I work with them to try to increase the amount of information on their websites so that natural search works, as well.
Exactly! The methodology is incorrect. And, after having spoken with the good people at AT&T (that's right, buy at the sign of the Death Star) it is the Telcos that are responsible for slow-downs, not the telephone makers.
Why? The Telcos want you using the latest tech so that you will have a two-year contract with them that you cannot easily get out of without paying them lots of money. This keeps you "loyal." And it gets you on the treadmill of upgrades that ensures your loyalty. So what the telcos do is that they "sunset" technology that supports the older phones. And all of their upgrades on their cell towers (which usually aren't really towers that much any more) support new radios and signaling, not the old stuff.
So blame Apple and Samsung all you want, but it's the Telcos that are responsible for slowing down the older tech, not the manufacturers.
You (and Greyfox) do not seem to understand what Google Ads are. They are, for the most part, not the display advertisements one tends to see on websites. Instead, they are textual only and associated with search or with websites that open up space on their site for text ads.
Ad Blocking software allows them to show and always has. And that is because they are unobtrusive and not annoying.
All of my browsers have some kind of ad-block technology in them. And the Google text ads show just fine, thank you.
I have dealt with Time Warner Cable, specifically in New York City. I have also dealt with Comcast. I think this merger is a natural for them because of several factors:
- These companies are just like one another. They victimize the consumer.
- If they say they will come between the hours of 8:00 AM and 2:00 PM, they will tend to come past 3:30 PM.
- they will not be able to schedule you in again for another week, because you were not there when their technician called.
- If you call them for technical support for any problem, you are the problem and they treat you like you are.
- They both claim that degrading their signal actually helps you.
- Time Warner Cable and Comcast earned bottom-of-the-barrel scores in a consumer satisfaction survey published on May 20th, 2014.
- Both companies have blocked broadcasters on their networks because they have walked out on talks for fees for "retransmission consent."
- Neither company has actually tried to speed up Internet service in any significant way in over five years.
- The production company (NBC) owned by Comcast gets an unfair advantage over other broadcastersÃ"then uses that advantage to transmit nothing special or unique
I think they should rename the combined company "Crappy Cable Internet and Phone" which will appropriately re-define what the consumer is about to experience. Renaming themselves CCIP would be a positive step.
it has been a regulated industry
Industry regulation does not constitute a non-free market, just as industry deregulation does not constitute a free market. I think you did not mean to suggest that regulation un-frees markets.
While the telecommunications industry has always been regulated, there are many very competitive industries that face regulation. The regulation, in effect, creates a more level playing field for all competitors within a market. For example, the contractor I know faces regulation. He has to register as a contractor and keep his registration current for each state in which he works. The money he pays into the state for that registration goes into a fund that will pay homeowners for botched jobs where the contracting firm goes bankrupt. Contractors are regulated by local laws to require a permit for the work that they do (these regulations also cross-regulate homeowners as well). Work must be subjected to inspection so that the work performed meets building codes. But nobody is saying that contractors have a monopoly, that there is no free market for contractors. Indeed, it's a pretty free market.
To suggest that any regulation makes a market "un-free" is to not understand regulation. Or free markets.
And, certainly such a treaty does exist, else no court in the USA would have had jurisdiction to demand the payments. And, from the standpoint of operating websites, it is pretty easy to block whole countries from seeing your website. All it takes is editing a
As to the banking issue, France is a signatory of a treaty within the European Community of Nations as well as the United States to sanction Iran regarding their development of atomic weapons. This is an agreement between the United States government, France and all like-minded governments that have decided that the sanctions are appropriate in view of the non-proliferation agreement signed by Iran (that's right, Iran under the Shah, but Iran, nonetheless).
Now, I am not an attorney and I do not play one on television, but my work takes me, quite frequently, into this area of international law, usually set up by treaties. In the United States, treaties are negotiated and signed by the Administration (the Executive) and ratified by the United States Senate. Many other countries also have a separate ratification process that follows a negotiation and signature. These treaties give the various courts in the various countries jurisdictionÃ"even though the violation did not occur within the borders of that court's country.
That is how international law works.
"but is it reasonable for her to deprive her child of the support and help of someone he loved just because that person said something stupid?"
Yes, you see, here is the crux of the problem. What is said is hurtful, tasteless and beyond the privilege afforded to your sister in this case. The child might have loved the person your sister portrayed and your sister might have even been the best intellectually disabled volunteer walking planet Earth. She may not have even meant it in that light. However she disowned all of that by making hurtful comments about her own work, that she could even mouth the words to see them in that light is the problem. So, the child may have been deprived of the most awesome disabled volunteer to walk this planet, but it was your sister whose actions caused that behavior. We all make mistakes, and mistakes have consequences. Some more grave than others. It's a lesson most children learn early, some a little later than others and in this case a lot later.
Is the mob always right? Of course not, but in this case and your sister's.. spot on.