I've spent years trying to pretend that Coldfusion isn't real, but somehow I keep running into it now and then.
It also works great as a bargaining tactic in the future. "What's that? You would like us to build our second GigaFactory in Detroit? Well, we might consider, but it sure is a pity that your state bans our sales. 'Course, we probably lost all kind of sales revenue from that move, and that will need to be made up somehow..."
They didn't have to Michigan is the home of Detroit the former "Motor City".
FTFY. Detroit is a shadow of its former self, thanks in large part to its heavy reliance on the Big Three. While it may still be referred to as "Motor City", the auto companies took much of their production lines and moved them to Mexico or elsewhere, even if HQ is still around there. Flint is much the same.
That the state legislature has no problem banning Tesla direct sales despite such actions speaks volumes about where the interests of the legislators truly lie.
I would love to see this get signed and, rather than spending money on a lawsuit, Tesla opens a factory in Detroit/Flint. No state rep is going to fight against jobs (even if the plants are mostly automated and make few permanent jobs, there's at least construction,) so all of them will be eating crow when people find out that all of these nice, shiny, and by-that-time-affordable cars are being moved to other states and can't be sold in Michigan. Once the plant is up I'd expect the law to be reversed quickly.
Considering that HBO is always an extra charge over regular cable (AFAIK), that the cable companies pay HBO to carry it (as opposed to some other channels, as I understand, like Shopping Network, that pay cable to carry it), and that this isn't the end of HBO on cable, I would be heavily surprised if it caused any change in cable prices.
And if they do go up, good: just gives people more of a reason to abandon them.
I'm pretty sure that not everyone agrees to such a thing.
While I've not had the pleasure of a relationship, I would think that a healthy, long-term relationship would involve knowing the boundaries of each other, both mentally and sexually (and maybe politically.) There will be some bumps (excuse the pun) as those boundaries are felt out (okay I'll stop now) early on, but eventually each one will know what they can and can't do both in public and private without explicit permission.
Another way to look at it is personal space in general. As a kid (and even the rare occasion as an adult) my mom can wipe a stain or smudge on me without asking me, or my dad can hold my shoulder while talking to me about something serious or to comfort me, and I wouldn't feel uncomfortable at all. But if a stranger or even a loose acquaintance did that it would make me incredibly uncomfortable and be seen as a massive invasion of private space (the wiping more than the shoulder.)
There's also implicit vs. explicit trust. A long-term relationship has implicit trust, but marriage makes it explicit.
Interesting, thanks for the link.
I admit that I don't follow football myself, but--from what I recall of time with my family--watching live games was often a very social event and important amongst many fans. I'm sure that core fans will go back and re-watch old games, but in my limited experience I think that a stand-alone package that shows games live (even if that's all it shows) would be far, far more appealing.
Where did you read that? At least per this NPR article:
Beginning in 2015, HBO will offer a streaming service to cord-cutters and other nonsubscribers on an a la carte basis. It should be noted that the announcement HBO released to the media does not explicitly say the service will be HBO GO (or that it won't), only that it will be "a stand-alone, over-the-top, HBO service." And, of course, it doesn't say how much the service will cost. It doesn't even say it will carry every HBO show, let alone what archival material will be available — HBO GO has a lot.
The announcement says HBO will "work with our current partners" and "explore models with new partners," but it seems inevitable that an arrangement like this will unsettle cable providers who have been able to use legitimate access to premium networks like HBO as one of the remaining barriers against cord-cutting, the practice of declining to have a cable subscription in favor of watching online.
Emphasis mine. While that incredibly vague part about partners could suggest tying it to ISPs, the straight-up statement of "stand-alone" contradicts such an idea.
But, even if it was a package deal, that's not new to ISPs: many have bundles with anti-virus subscriptions and some might do Hulu or Netflix trials. None of these are big pushers, however, and HBO would be a game changer in that.
As opposed to when the government gives them a local monopoly?
This was just announced today; I guess the submitter assumes everyone is plastered to their many-tech-related RSS feeds and already read about it.
Of course, "announced" is a lose term here. As far as I'm aware, all they've said is that they're going to offer a new streaming option. That's it. No price, nothing about what HBO content it will have (just the live feed? Can you watch individual episodes? Can you watch past series?). Just that it's coming.
Considering that HBO is one of the main reasons a lot of people don't abandon cable, I wonder if the various cable companies are worried. I can just imagine them rounding up the lobbyists, telling them to throw money at whatever Congresscritter they have in their pocket to somehow make this illegal.
Live sports are the other "main" reason, of course. If the likes of ESPN and the NFL make stand-alone streaming services (I believe they have the "requires cable subscription" offerings at the moment, like HBO already has) then it could be the death knell of cable subscriptions in our country.
Yeah, that was my thought on skimming TFA. If the company pays, what happens if the woman leaves the job (be it quitting, fired, laid off)? Does she have to pay back some or all of the amount the company paid in order to keep access to her eggs? What if the company goes under? I couldn't find mention of this in the article.
Also, the line quoted by jargonburn ("helping women be more productive human beings") is the parting quote from the article said by Christy Jones, founder of Extend Fertility. I expected this to be a line from some old male, so seeing it come from a woman is a tad boggling as I also think the line is demeaning towards women.
they use their current nightmare system to manipulate companies into doing their bidding
If there's a conspiracy behind our current corporate tax policy, I'm sure that it's the large corporations manipulating the government to create these onerous tax laws so that the government can manipulate any growing competition to the large corporations. Those tax breaks? Feel good fuzzies for the common people that are easy for the large corporations to deal with but harder for the growing ones.
Large corporations are the ones manipulating our government, not the other way around.
[T]he Alliance tried to chemically modify its populace to be peaceful. This worked perfectly; it eliminated violence, but in the process it had a fatal side effect. The inhabitants lost all ambition
;they stopped doing any work, stopped talking to each other, stopped reproducing and eventually stopped even feeding. For 0.1% of the population it had the opposite effect and caused extremely violent behavior, beyond mere psychosis but animalism. The "survivors" of Miranda were the Reavers who started to menace the Rim planets.
It should be noted that he was watched at all time by several people though
So are magicians.
A clerk has zero incentive to get you through the line as quickly as possible.
While I agree with your first line, I disagree with this.
It's been a while since I worked retail, and I never worked registers as a regular thing, but even these days I can see boards hanging on the walls of stores (sometimes back in an employee-only area, sometimes right out in front of the lines) that show rankings of either Customers Per Minute (CPM) or Items Per Minute (IPM). While I have no personal knowledge about these, I would bet they're used for, at worst, some bad management "incentive" like "you get a bag of chips if you're highest at the end of the month!" or, at best, part of promotion and raises.
I love self-checkout lines myself; as long as you only have a few items and they aren't packed with families trying to check out a cart full of groceries, you can zip right though. I get to avoid human interaction most of the time (idle chit-chat severely annoys me), bag groceries my (anal) way, and get out quickly. There's also a space-saving feature: six machines and one clerk can replace three lines that might not all be open at the same time, anyway. But, for all of that, I doubt you will ever completely get rid of cashiers. Maybe once all items have their own RFID tags and a cart can simply be scanned without having to remove stuff, but that is still quite some time off.
Not to mention that creativity often coincides with critical thinking, and critical thinkers are more likely to realize that something a company doing is illegal and have the moral fiber to blow the whistle.
So not only are creative types unnecessary to giant companies, they are an active threat and so should be avoided unless they are a known quantity (i.e. plays golf with the CEO every Saturday.)