Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: I think you're wrong. (Score 1) 229

Your idea assumes that the price-per-kb is reasonable. If you look at what people are currently charged by AT&T for "overage", you get an idea of what they think they should charge. The only reason that your "package" price-per-kb is lower is because most people don't use it all. If you only actually paid for what you use, you'd be paying a *LOT* more for it (close the the "overage" rate I expect).

Comment: Re:Down the line... (Score 1) 248

by WizADSL (#44383679) Attached to: Court Upholds Ruling On Dish Network's 'Hopper'

THIS.

If the actors/actresses didn't get these ridiculous salaries there'd be no need for so many ads.

I think that's a catch 22. If you where the star of a show making $5000 per episode and found out that each episode was turning a profit of $3,000,000 then you'd probably want a higher salary since your effort is making someone else so much money. Just like with movie actor's salaries if an actor becomes more popular more people come to see their movies and the movies make progressively more money and of course the actor would want a higher salary.

Comment: Re:Down the line... (Score 1) 248

by WizADSL (#44383545) Attached to: Court Upholds Ruling On Dish Network's 'Hopper'

If you could subscribe only to the specific programs that you wanted, and in doing so receive them free of advertising, but pay all costs via your fees, , what would your cost per hour be?

As good as this seems on paper, along with the idea of being able to only subscribe to the channels you want I think the reality of it would suck. I believe that if the revenue model for television had always been a subscription per show or even channel basis then a lot of shows/channels would have never existed. If you look at what shows are popular now then I hope you LOVE reality TV and want to watch all 17 variations of Survivor and American Idol that would come to be. I hope you don't like sci-fi because there wouldn't be enough money in it to make any of those shows. The fact is I (and probably a lot of others) watch a LOT of TV we wouldn't pay specifically for.

Comment: Re:Ok..So verizon has shown they cant be trusted.. (Score 1) 168

by WizADSL (#43405391) Attached to: FBI's Smartphone Surveillance Tool Explained In Court Battle
Just an observation, in your post you mention "if the device is not subsidized by verizon, and is the user's personal property". Assuming that ownership of the device makes a difference, I think you could argue that he owns it either way. If I buy a phone that's worth $500 for $200 in exchange for a 2 year contract then there will be a penalty that will more than pay for the phone if I cancel. If that penalty is part of my agreement then I don't see how the phone wouldn't be considered "mine" since I've agreed to either honor my contract or reimburse them if I don't; assuming I do either of those that phone is mine.

Comment: Re:Seriously? 6-3??? (Score 1) 648

by WizADSL (#43217065) Attached to: Supreme Court Upholds First Sale Doctrine

If the shoes you bought were subsidized with taxpayer money would you still feel right about it? What if you go get free food from the homeless shelter and then turn around and sell it for profit?

A lot of countries subsidize textbooks so they cost next to nothing for the general public. This guy is profiting off of public good will.

If that's true then the sale of those items should be better controlled. If I walk into a government subsidized bookstore and they let me buy 1000 copies of the same book and walk out the door then there is a problem.

Comment: Re:not really a zeroday exploit... (Score 1) 40

by WizADSL (#43128505) Attached to: Facebook Rolled Its Own 0Day For Red Team Exercise
I imagine the team(s) that responded to the security threat didn't know it was a drill. I think the idea was to create the situation using a real security hole but with the cooperation of an engineer that was playing the part of a "tricked" employee to allow the vulnerability to be exploited in a realistic way. I ASSUME that the team members responsible for the creation of the exploit program were not part of the team(s) that responded to the incident.

Comment: Maybe (Score 1) 339

by WizADSL (#43095203) Attached to: Drone Comes Within 200 Feet of Airliner Over New York
Maybe is was an R/C plane as others have suggested and possibly it had accidentally gotten out of range of the transmitter. I know technology has changed a great deal since I was in the hobby but it used to be that if your plane/buggy got out of range of your radio the servos would stay in whatever position they were in at last contact. Even at that time there were devices available that would put the servos in a pre-programmed position in that event. I assume this has probably been built into newer hardware but maybe not and certainly a failure is not out of the question.

Comment: What the hell? (Score 1) 207

by WizADSL (#43046091) Attached to: Groupon Still Losing Money, CEO Is Fired And Leaks Final Email
I think Groupon is GREAT, if you're a consumer. For businesses not so much, Groupons are expensive to offer, if I'm not mistaken the vendor pays 50% of the discount value to Groupon as a fee. So if you offer a Groupon that entiles you to $100 worth of stuff for $50, then Groupon gets $25 from the vendor for each sale. From the vendors point of view, you just got $100 worth of stuff for $25, pretty straightforward. I'm sick and tired of reading about businesses that lost money by offering a Groupons, if you did then you don't have a grasp of simple math. You simply CAN'T offer a Groupon where you lose money, if you can't meet your costs in my example for the $25 you will actually keep, then you can't make the offer.

I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.

Working...