So that's both CopSub and SpaceX having a boo-boo thing month - coinkidink?
Get a Dyson - it uses less power, but is more efficient at turning that power into loud noise!
Yes, if you pay for a paper-copy of the Mail, you get ads
Also, at rates of 1-10GBP, there is room for more than 4 sites before you hit 140GBP - I didn't enumerate every site on the planet, just some examples. I'm sure some are already ad-free, some have ads you do not mind or that you can ignore, so you could chose to only pay a subscription at those site where it would help you the most?
My last employer paid our private internet-bill (up to some amount), as everyone in my team needed internet when working from home during night- and weekend-shifts.
This went well until they repeatedly "forgot" to pay the bill, and the provider cut internet, phone and TV to some of the guys in the team, due to considering them all part of a single package (despite being billed separately).
C'mon, it is the year 2014 already - no-one uses Fahrenheit any longer.
hmm... people in low-cost countries should start studying US law, so they can give cheap legal-advice
I don't think you're looking at this the right way....
Ads are per-site.
Those sites are generally free (ignoring the various ads).
To pay for an "ad-free internet", you would pay the sites you use directly, to get an ad-free experience with them.
You use YouTube? Pay them 3GBP/month.
You use Slashdot? Pay them 1GBP/month.
You use Reddit?
You use The Daily Mail? Pay them 9.99GBP/month.
Yes, this doesn't make the complete internet ad-free, but it makes everything you use on the internet ad-free; your experience becomes an ad-free one.
No issues with a central collection and distribution, no licensing headaches, no cumbersome barrier-of-entry for new sites, and still the presence of this "democracy" thing you talk about.
Note: The idea of for-pay TV (Satellite TV in the form of Sky) was that the consumers would pay directly, and not have any ads
If GoDaddy filed an effectively-bogus DMCA, why weren't they punished?
"[..] statement by you UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY that the information in your notice is accurate and that you are the copyright owner or authorized to act on the copyright owner's behalf."
Am thinking we should look at the requirements and budgets set out by management, before we put the admins into the stockades.
Yeah, the admins probably could have done better, but if there were expressed requirements to do stuff in a given way, perchance from upper management to make something easier, the admins might not have had much say in the matter.
Likewise, if there wasn't sufficient budget to do things correctly (not really seeming likely, given the nature of this beast, but possible), the admins cannot really be blamed.
Leave the U.S. and move to an actually-free country?
This is written, literally, RIGHT BETWEEN THE SUMMARY AND THE COMMENT SECTION:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I'm thinking it was around the time everyone there were either prisoners, or people hired to look after said prisoners
Thats assuming you know your going to be protesting with enough lead time.
If you get caught up in a spontaneous protest your not going to have time to go out and by a disposable phone.
Try to not "get caught up" in random protests.