The countries that have *actual* government run healthcare shake heads sadly watching the spectacle.
"In March 1999, Musk co-founded X.com, an online financial services and e-mail payment company. One year later, the company merged with Confinity, which operated a subsidiary called PayPal. PayPal and X.com each had a person-to-person email-based payment system. The original intent was to merge the two systems, but it never happened.
Musk strongly favored the PayPal brand over the X brand. After initially co-branding PayPal with the X brand, including making X.com a subdomain of PayPal, he moved to officially remove the X.com brand for good. Following this, the board appointed PayPal founder Peter Thiel as interim CEO. PayPal's early growth was due in large part to a successful viral growth campaign created by Musk. In October 2002, PayPal was acquired by eBay for US$1.5 billion in stock, of which $165 million was given to Musk. Before its sale, Musk, the company's largest shareholder, owned 11.7% of PayPal's shares."
TL;DR. Musk didn't create PayPal, he cofounded a company with a competing service that merged with the company that owned PayPal and while at the merged company pushed to use the PayPal platform as it was better. Then he left in 2002.
I really don't think we can lay the lion's share of PayPal's shittyness at his feet based on that. By that logic, Windows 8 should see Bill Gates hanged...
"why not take that time to toss in some viagra information for you to listen to"
Now you're just being silly.
"if you don't care about them, then let these scammers have their fun, what do you care?"
Oh, it's FUN! Scamming vulnerable people out of money is FUN! Scaring the shit out of some grandmother and then scamming her out of most of her food budget for the month is FUN!!! Can I have your grandma's number? It's all in fun...
Why not both? But you're not getting this, or you don't really care if anyone else gets scammed. Which is fine, but I also hope you don't expect other people to be altruistic towards you or your family. Because that would be hypocritical.
Not in my experience. The 300-500 segment of the market is split around 50/50 in my peer group and extended family between iPads and Android 7"-10" tablets. I've even seen the fanboyism catch on such to the extent that my entire immediate family only buys Samsung tablets and phones. And I with my 2013 Nexus 7 are an outcast heathen....
But also to be fair, the Surface Pro has more than enough horsepower to run full Photoshop just fine. Unless of course people are now saying that a quad core i7 with 8GB of RAM is not sufficient to run Photoshop.....
"And a Surface is nothing more than a crappy overpriced under performing laptop that wants to be a tablet."
Lies. The top end Surface tablets are actually excellent tablets and nearly top marks in the 'being a laptop' department as well. I used to think like you do about them until one of the guys at the office took the plunge and bought one and I got to use it. It's very good and if I didn't have to use a corporate-imaged (and locked down) laptop for my portable device I'd buy one in a heartbeat. In fact I'm trying to think of a way to justify the company buying me one even though it's not on the "approved devices" list.
That's not really correct. That only works if everyone in the world calls their mother, father, aunt, grandma, etc, which is obviously never going to happen. So again, all you've done is moved the scammer on quickly to his next target. Think of it this way: if it takes this guy an hour to scam someone, he spends an average of 30 minutes finding each new mark that leads to a cash scamming, and he works 8 hours per day, on average he will scan 5 to 6 people per day. If you waste an hour of his time, you've saved someone else from getting scammed that day.
"people in the region do pay for it"
I think you mean the first generation of people during/after construction. I live a 10 minute walk away from a water system capped by 2 70+ year old dams and have never once had them have an adverse effect on my life. In fact, looking at the electricity rates for our friends to the south in the US, it seems the American national average cost of electricity is 12.97 cents/kwh. Because of these dams and others like them in my province, I pay about half of that. And the recreation areas they create are a pretty nice side bonus.
Still looking to see what ongoing "costs" to the residents of the area there are, haven't found any.
> breaking time-share agreements is a viable business model!
There's also a secondary market for purchasing other peoples' bad timeshare investments at a loss. So if you are for some crazy reason interested in the idea of a timeshare, DO NOT buy from the company outright. Shop the reseller market to see what kind of a deal you can get.
No, I don't think you understand how this goes. A corporation normally breaks the law and shows up in court will pin it on procedure or some scapegoat and mainly get off with a fine and that's that. This on the other hand is not breaking a law and ending up in court, it's pretending to issue documents on behalf of said court. That is a challenge to their authority that the courts will not let stand. Even the scummiest of RIAA lawyer is not stupid enough to do something like this because they know that their life would turn into a shitticane if they were caught. It seems there's enough traction on this that the baleful eye of that court will turn to Sundance Vacations shortly, and whoever is an officer of that company on paper is about to be very very sorry.
This product is baffling. The original nVidia SHIELD's competitive advantage was the built in controller. Now they give you a tablet and a wireless controller. Just like ANY other tablet out there already. With all of the same problems. How do I play on that tablet when I'm on the train or bus with the controller? Balance the tablet on my lap? I tried that with my Nexus 7, it doesn't work worth a crap. I don't play GTA 3 on my N7, not because it can't handle the game, but because using a separate controller with the tablet is a logistical nightmare. SHIELD v1 solved that problem, and now v2 re-introduced it. I don't get it.
"he ISP's can't prevent them from doing this and ISP's customers can choose another ISP that doesn't do it"
Until a) they ALL do it to level the playing field and ensure that all ISPs get to bleed the major content providers equally, or b) Comcast finishes buying every last major ISP like they seem to be planning based on their past and pending acquisitions.
>The courts have basically said you need to pay someone to show them in movies
I don't recall hearing anything about George W Bush getting a paycheck from Oliver Stone's 2008 movie W:
Or for that matter, him being shown in Fahrenheit 9/11.
Nor do I recall the Mercury astronauts getting any compensation for their being portrayed in The Right Stuff, or Apollo 13's astronauts for the movie of the same name. Or Patton for Patton, etc. etc.
The problem with that argument is that Noriega is a public historical figure. That's like saying every author ever has to get it cleared to use Reagan, Bush, Obama or Palin in some context in their stories.