Also, as per This comment, it appears that the school has a policy that specifically says that the student retains ownership.
"They give absolutely no information about how many viewers watched the content."
Why would this matter? In TV-land, the networks care because the *advertisers* care about getting their ads in between popular shows, and one of the best benefits of Netflix is that there *aren't* any ads except perhaps existing product placement in-show. In Netflix, there seem to be lots of places that discuss which shows are most popular, so there should at least be some gauge as to whether the show is going to be worth carrying forward from wherever they're getting that information. Judging by how Netflix was willing to pay the US internet carriers their pound of flesh, I'd imagine that they have margins enough to still send good cash to the content owners.
Streaming week-old shows might be a bit much to hope for, but in reality if we even had better options for purchasing episodes that would great. Rather than the current cableco setup, I'd envision somewhere where you add credit, and then can choose what you view from your available credits (e.g. to watch the latest Simpsons or Big Bang episode is $0.25). Overall cost might actually be much the same but it would pull in the outliers who are only prone to certain shows and not willing to blow $50-100 on cable packages to watch the 1-2 commercial-ladel episodes a week.
This would seem to be an avenue where micropayments might actually work out well for everyone. They could even throw in incentives like a coupon towards buying the season with discounts from the episodes you already paid to watch.
It doesn't hurt that Canadian Netflix etc has been improving their content, and the cable monopolies recently had to change to a-la-carte packaging for their services as well. There's also seems to be a bit of a dearth of great movies, so maybe there's less to pirate.
You assume that they're a 24 station. Many stations (particular those at grocery stores, etc) do not operate 24hr, so it's feasible - possibly even likely - that the updates are being done during the off-hours.
A big problem with MW jobs isn't just the shitty per-hour rate, but the shitty number of hours. $15/h is nice but not so helpful if you only get 10h/week.
I wonder if anywhere has address a "minimum weekly pay" or something of the like, which would put pressure on businesses to actually provide regular staff with useful hours rather than just bringing in a ton of people all at unlivable hours. The latter tends to put people in situations where they're working multiple jobs to get enough pay-hours for bills, but go through hell trying to get their hours to line up (because generally they're also not consistent) and have no time for any personal life.
Ditto. I have been downmodded more recently, but interestingly that always tends to be on articles that have country-polarizing issues, so I'm guessing that the Russian/Chinese PR team didn't appreciate some of my comments.
Ah yes, the +1 funny on the comment that indicates that a man whose wife does the driving isn't a real man...
Glad to see how much we've matured around here.
I believe that Saudi Arabia might be accepting immigration applications. You'd fit right in.
It's one thing to hire talented worked away from a company and have them design new things.
It's another to get your grips on one worker, and essentially use him as a mole to take away a whole team and/or any proprietary stuff they've been working on (which is what seems to be alleged here).
If the latter is allowed, then if any smaller company is working on a breakthrough idea can be easily broken and their tech taken by a larger company with buckets full of cash to steal their staff and secrets.
"But where's my choice of "watch it with the software I want to use"? Right, it's gone, because of the DRM."
There are plenty of situations where there's not much choice and it has little to do with DRM. In this case, you have *MORE* choice than before (and you're STILL bitching about it, I might add).
Your choice before was: Watch Netflix on a non-Linux OS (including: Windows, Mac, later Android/iDevices). Due to this change, you now have the ADDITIONAL choice to watch it on Linux, which is something a lot of us have been wanting for quite some time. You ALSO have the choice to do things EXACTLY as before, by NOT USING the f**king plugin.
So no choice is gone, because frankly it was never there. You now have additional choices. You also have the choice to go out and buy the bloody DVD and watch it that way. If you want to bitch about DRM then have a look at Blu-Ray which we still can't watch properly on Linux.
This sort of crap is why Linux users look bad, because even when we get something there's always somebody who has to piss and moan about it, and you make us all look like a bunch of whiners. It's their service, and unlike a physical owned medium they do have rights to determine how that service is access. Don't like it, don't use it. But stop using "choice" as a reason to bitch about it when you're actually being given additional options you NEVER HAD before.
"It's a sad day for Mozilla, the w3c, the web as a whole, and open culture"
Yes, it's a sad day when a vendor offers a CHOICE for a plugin which adds much-requested functionality to their product. Heaven fucking forbid.
There are two reasons I generally still even both to keep windows around, one is Netflix (which become a non-issue when Chrome started to work for it on 'nix), and the other is various games (also starting to change with Steam pushing Linux/GL).
Don't want it, don't use it. There are reasons to be open, but frankly I can see some valid reasons for not being thus. Sometimes FOSS zealots sound very similar to the "well, I've got nothing to hide" types when it comes to discussing surveillance.
Indeed, there are a number of people who post on Facebook about cop deaths, and then that "there were no riots after this guy was killed."
Well, duh. There's generally not any riots when a convenience store clerk is killed (in similar manner, I might add). Why? Who are you going to riot against? Is a cop being shot more terrible than the night-shift guy at 7-11?
Being a cop is not just a guy with a bad, blue uniform, and a job. They're a representative of government authority, with more power than the average citizen. When they start popping off citizens, they're display a form of OPPRESSION. People aren't rioting because Bob X died, they're rioting because a representative of government authority whose job is to PROTECT citizens is instead OPPRESSING and KILLING them.
Being attracted to conditions similar to your parents, perhaps?
"here is one that mainly affects men do let's try and deal with it"
What's the gender-split on this? I've heard a few more cases of men living-like-pigs surround by pizza and big gulps but there are still lots of women who sink unhealthy amounts of time into WoW (also farmville) etc
So in other words, I expect neither Xena the warrior princess, nor a supermodel, but can expect decent hygiene and fitness/bodily-upkeep.
Decent intelligence, and an interest in further learning.
Good employability, with a good job and willingness to help foot the bills.
Some interest in games, electronics, etc would be a plus, but otherwise just a willingness to put up with my odd hobbies.
Now... good luck finding it. Yes, there are those that fit said profile, but the reality is that most women are just as shallow as the guys, just in different ways. For some reason, it's been found to be more socially acceptable... and expectations of men have gone up (just look at the body-types of male actors).
There's a huge backlash against female body-image, but frankly few people want a partner with a body like a dumpling and acne, and that applies to both genders. At the same time, somebody with an average build and decent attitude - who cleans up nicely - will do fine in most cases. Yeah, the guys with 6-packs and the women shaped like a bottle with double-D's get noticed, and they're probably going to be more visible in movies and pr0n, but that's all fantasy stuff.
The ones that are pushing the generally unrealistic body image? Well other than magazines/hollywood it's actually NOT the opposite sex. WOMEN are more likely to get catty and demean other women who don't manicure bi-weekly, dress in $100 clothes, and/or spend an hour putting on makeup. Similarly, MEN are more likely to harass other men for being too big, too small, or otherwise not spending 3 hours a day hitting the gym.
Seriously. Yes, women will notice a "hot" guy. Guys will notice a "hot" girl. But for 90% of us that's not what makes a perfect match, it's just something that attracts the eye might like any other form of window-dressing.
My wife is pretty good looking. Neither of us will be on a magazine but we both try to take care of ourselves. She doesn't make as much as me - though she has a high "level" of paper education it's not a great field - but she does have drive to improve. She has zero interest in games/electronics, but for the most part she leaves me my time so long as I do the same for her and we still have time together as well as keeping the house in order. She still notices hot guys (Chris Hemsworth seems to be a favorite), and I still notice hot girls, but we both recognise that it's just eye-candy.
Looking back historically though for both genders, I'd say that the rule runs both ways. Women tend to get treated like toys, and men tend to get treated like walking wallets. If you can, avoid those types of relationships but frankly it's still pretty common and rather painful to go through.