You are incorrectly confabulating broadcasting with content producing.

It is not "content producers" that people don't want because guess what it isn't the content producers that are suing Aereo.

Instead it is the over the air broadcasters that are suing and no one wants them. They are not all the producers and not all of them produce content Back before we had internet, cable TV, and satellite TV, actual over the air broadcasting made sense. But not any more.

People do want the content - which is why content producers will continue to exist. People do NOT want to receive it by broadcast, which is why people want Aereo to take that junk off the air and put it on wires.

Yes it is true that the broadcasters used to be wealthy and therefore bought up most (but not all) of the content producers. Now the broadcasters are going the way of the Buggy Whip. They may be able to survive as content producers, but only if they stop trying to marry their content production to their horrible, stupid delivery system that few people want and is only be propped up by out-dated laws.

If they insist on sending their wonderful content out on horrible radiowaves, then they will have to do so a week after they offer them to cable operators (just like Hulu does with Hulu prime.). You want the stuff right away, pay for it. If you don't care, wait for for it.

Some idiot decided that it was reasonable for people that broadcast their programing over the air for free to then charge other people to retransmit it.

It was a bad law in the first place, poorly written, which let the networks charge money to cable people when their entire original business was charging advertisers and giving their stuff away for free.

Suddenly you let them charge others for their stuff that they agreed to give away for free originally and this caused the problems.

Aero are not doing anything wrong. The people doing wrong things are the over the air free TV networks that are charging.

The real truth is that the over the air for free model is OUTDATED - just like the buggy whips. I know of nobody actually using the radio waves. They only work in small areas and are only profitable if there is a large population. But in those areas you get so much more from cable TV.

In areas with less population, the over the air broadcasters are not profitable.

The asteroid impacts detected are almost all air bursts and they have no radiation. So almost no damage is being done. A better description would be to compare it to lightning strikes, not nuclear bombs.

It's not like we are getting city sized destruction on a regularly basis, it's like we are getting thunderstorm type events on a regularly basis.

The real danger would be for things signifcantly larger that hit ground, rather than the upper atmosphere.

Cody is a gun nut, a pothead, and an anarchist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

You have made a bad definition of wealth. The major problem is you have fallen for the common mistake fo measuring wealth by income. A single, healthy childless 21 year old women making $100,000/year is wealthy. A married 50 year old women, with 1 grand child, 4 children, 2 in college, and a husband with dementia is not wealthy.

The real way to measure wealth is how Forbes does it - not income, but by net worth.

If your net worth is over 2 million, you are wealthy. If your net worth is more than your age in thousands, you are middle class. Otherwise, you are poor. I don't care if you make $300,000 a year, if your net worth is negative,you are poor.

A prime example of this is Donald Trump. The man has never been poor, even when his income was negative. Why? Because his assets always far exceeded his debt, even when he was losing money hand over fist.

By my definition, quite a few people are poor that think they are wealthy - particularly musicians and sports stars that make millions but save nothing.

The only people that don't have someone 'upriver', drink cattle urine instead.

I'm not sure whether or not I have to say this, but I will: milk is not actually the cow's urine. Rather, it's exudate from mammary glands.

Really very very simple. Pass a simple law that says no contract can invalidate your right to use - unless 1) both you and your lawyer has signed said contract - and each parties lawyer can have no connection whatsoever to the other party, their lawyer, etc and also 2) Said contract was negotiated by both parties, rather than designed by one party and the other was required to accept it as is.

First, he assumed that given x effort, you could find bu #1. That is a reasonable expectation, given the state of programming today. Bugs, while not infinite, are in fact so numerous so that the amount of time it takes to find them all exceeds the project life of software.

Then he assumed that given y effort you could then find bug #2. Again a reasonable assumption.

Third assumption, that x=y. This is FALSE. For that assumption to be true, then bugs are being found randomly, not by effort. The truth is x is ALWAYS less than y, because it takes skill and effort to find them.

Each successive bug is more and more difficult to find. However, it is an exponential chart. This means when just starting out, it APPEARS that x=y, but the further you go along, then Y starts being significantly greater than x.

This is a common problem, faced by mothers cleaning their house and by cops facing criminals. By the time they clean up one mess, a new one has popped up. But that does not mean you stop cleaning. Your efforts do mean something. The idea is to always be one step AHEAD of the mess, not behind it. That way you always end up with an acceptably dirty situation, rather than a virus infected/crime ridden area.

Sure my blackberry is a LITTLE bit larger. But it has the keyboard. And the tiny floppy disk looks a lot like the sim card we slip into the back.

This picture is in my opinion pretty darn CLOSE to what we really ended up having.

Oh, the styling is bad - the keyboard is unusable. But it looks reasonable, not stupid.

I am not saying we don't require intelligence. Just that we don't quite as much need training as say a Doctor, Lawyer, MBA.

My best work is creative, not using things I learned.

There is a huge difference between a company that makes a good product and a company that is good at advertising.

Honestly that's the main reason why tech people need to get MBA's to run their business. It's not that hard to figure out how to manage and do back office stuff passably well. Oh sure, you might pay too much in taxes, but it's not that big a deal.

What is a big deal is the ability to get the word out - to tell people about your product.

And I can honestly say that for most tech jobs, we are more akin to a plumber or an electrician, than anything else.

Yes, if your company makes it's money making and selling software or hardware, SOME of the high end jobs are different. Similarly, the guys that make toilets have some high end jobs that are not blue collar workers.

But most of us don't write the big code. Instead we install, maintain and fix stuff that some idiot took a big dump in.

We are plumbers, not Management. Hell, we even hate the 'suits'.

For the majority of jobs, we don't need a BA. Honestly, my BA was in political science, not computer science. Yes, I took post-graduate classes, yes I taught myself. But NOTHING I learned from teachers at my university is essential to my job.

I don't know your particular situation, mainly because you provide NO SPECIFICS. But I am willing to bet the medical care you got before was for MUCH less expensive things then you got now.

As in broken leg before, head injury now.

The basic fact is, if they did not exploit it, then someone working for them is thinking "DAMN, I wish I thought of using that!"

Do you have sources, or is that just a rumor?