FWIW, the term "snuff film" was coined to reference not just a video which merely shows death -- even intentionally -- but one which was created for the purpose of entertainment, usually for sexual gratification, and sold for profit.
iPhones have had the ability to be remote wiped for a long time. Yet I have not heard of a pandemic of hacker-led mass bricking of iPhones.
Now you have.
That's because games themselves are eligible for very limited IP protections.
I've met some rednecks who fit that description as well. And, hell, some idiots with no accent at all. Poor communication skills are poor communication skills -- it's certainly not something that's either exclusive to, or endemic of, non-native speakers.
And FWIW, I've found that most people who can't understand accents tend to be poor communicators themselves.
Exceptional workers don't need H1Bs. H1Bs are not designed to bring talent to the US; they're (ostensibly) designed to meet a temporary demand that cannot be adequately met by the domestic workforce. That's why they are temporary permits. Talented workers get first priority in immigrating, and I welcome them along with you. I welcome anyone who immigrates here, TBH. More power to them. But that doesn't change the fact that H1Bs are being exploited, and it's negatively impacting the labor market for citizens as well.
I'll admit that Noone's work hasn't exactly been Oscar material, but she's pretty hot, and her producing skills might not be bad. I say it's worth a try, at least.
He's not in jail for recording a movie; he's in jail for distributing copies and selling them. Selling copies isn't a civil offense; it's a crime. And did you miss the part where he kept selling and distributing even after his arrest? I have pretty liberal views on file sharing, but this guy was asking for it.
When you say $230, people are going to compare what you're offering -- ad-free browsing, in this case -- to whatever else they can buy for $230. Maybe it's a new phone, or some clothes, or whatever it is non-nerds spend money on. (Dates?) Regardless, it's probably going to be more satisfying than ad-free browsing.
If you rephrase it as $20/mo, you'll have a lot more takers. $20 falls into most people's "impulse buy" category. $20 will get you an order of pizza, or a short taxi ride, or a ballcap. They don't have to consider whether they can afford it, or what else they can do with that money.
But if you're looking for someone to subsidize basic research with little or no investment return potential, don't look to a competitive company to do it...
CMB was discovered while looking for noise sources in microwave communications. Transistors weren't patented because the lawyers thought it wasn't new. (Arguably a huge mistake.) UNIX made money by being used internally, and was marketed within a few years, both directly through AT&T as System V, as well as licensed to third parties. Every famous accomplishment was the direct result of looking for technologies to either add new commercial offerings, improve existing offerings, or reduce operating costs.
If you're looking for research for its own sake with little or no direct goals for commercialization, you'll only find it at a very small subset of colleges, universities, and government/NGO enterprises like CERN. Even then, it often becomes necessary to license inventions to stay afloat.
Interesting bit of the training material I found:
"Fuck you,"-- that's my name. You know why, mister? You drove a Hyundai to get here. I drove an eighty-thousand dollar BMW. THAT'S my name. And your name is "you're wanting." You can't play in the man's game, you can't close them - go home and tell your wife your troubles. Because only one thing counts in this life: Get them to sign on the line which is dotted. You hear me, assholes? ABC. A, always. B, be. C, closing. Always Be Closing. Always Be Closing!
If we estimate only perfect performance, then we fail to acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world. Spills are normal consequences of oil operations. It's not whether or not they *should* happen, but rather how often they *do* happen that matters.
Oh, forgot to mention that this law is basically unenforceable, which makes it a bad law. If my neighbor is flying a drone, and I presume that he's behaving lawfully (as I should) and not filming me, then there's no justification to get a warrant to see if he actually was recording me. OTOH, if his use of a drone is itself a reasonable suspicion, then no one can use drones, period. (Or planes, or satellites, or telescopes.)
First, I'm almost positive that Arizona can't regulate use of its airspace, including the reasons for use.
Second, this seems like a bad idea. The problem is not drones, it's a lack of comprehensive privacy protection. With well-defined expectations for privacy, it won't matter how those expectations are violated or what technology is used to do it. Address privacy, and the rest will follow naturally. (And good luck expecting privacy in outdoor spaces.)
If you want to convince me, you'll have to start by using words appropriately, facts in lieu of vagaries, and avoid drawing parallels between twitter posters and slaves.