Where do you understand that from? AFAIK cable companies don't insert ads into the local networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc). They do insert ads into "cable channels" but those ad slots are specifically designed for the cable companies to sell ad space for. There may be a default commercial that plays for the national feed, but it can be overlaid with a local ad if the slot sells.
Networks don't want Aereo as it will rock the boat and introduce competition in markets that have long been dominated by oligopolies. In most areas, you have one cable company that services the area, and if you're lucky, the local telco might also offer television service. You also have Dish and DirecTV.
Most networks opt to charge the cable/telco/satellite company a fee instead of forcing them to be carried as a must-carry station. If a more convenient or alternate source of locals were available, it could result in lower revenues from fees. So stations have a reason to want to keep availability scarce. Networks obviously have a vested interest in keeping the stations happy, so they fight the fight. Cable companies also join in as they may also own the local tv station. Or the TV network. Or are the content producers. Or all the above.
It's all about maximizing revenue while stifling competition that may take a portion of their pie.
So a simplified summary of the issue is:
Aereo: We're not a cable company, we don't have to pay royalties.
Networks: Yes you are, you have to pay us
Aereo: No we aren't. Sue us.
Lower Courts:You're like a cable company.
Aereo: Are you sure?
Aereo: Crap. We'll be a cable company and pay the royalties then.
Networks: You're not a cable company
Aereo: C'mon man!
No drone, or "remotely piloted aircraft" in DoD newspeak, should be flown over a populated area.
So would flying them over a large body of mostly unoccupied water be ok? Like perhaps a river that's 2/3 of a mile wide?
It's basically verifying the validity of stolen or generated card numbers.
The only bad programmers I've ever encountered, are programmers that are inconsiderate.
Those who do not consider that the purpose of a computing language is to communicate with other developers, not just the computer. That's really the main common-factor I've found among "bad programmers". It's a skill, that can be learned, but it's an emotional skill. Some people can be very intelligent, brilliant even, and still not want to learn that one crucial skill.
Why do I think this program will end up with a tiny, tiny fraction of that?
Why would you not think that $100b will be just a tiny fraction of the real final cost? What was the last completed military development project that came in at a tiny fraction of the original budgeted cost?
Based on the average airline's financials, they are doing well enough putting themselves out of business.
A) There is this little thing called "The Internet" that people use to send each other information. Why the hell would someone go to the risk of keeping a thumb drive that can be identified as in their possession and have their fingerprints, when they can just send an encrypted file?
Why the hell would anyone save something to the cloud that can be electronically eavesdropped when it can be saved to a flash drive locally and available whenever/wherever you may be? It applies just as much to illegal images, your legal banking/tax records, or anything else in between.
WE don't lack the will.
We lack the power.
The ones with the power lack the will (or desire) - because their power depends on control of generation of energy through resources they control; namely fossil fuels. They're not going to give up that power while they have it. Not voluntarily.
The reason thorium never hurt anybody, is because it is complete fantasy. Nobody has ever built one that has demonstrated any degree of industrial reliability and usefulness. Thorium is up there with Fusion, as far as being a demonstrated technology.