This is it exactly. Commercial real estate. This is why even state government agencies are being pressured to get back in the office: most states lease their office space.

If the wealthy elites want something, the media will print endless stories about why it is necessary and why, in fact, everyone already loves doing it. The government will pass any laws necessary to get the thing done, in a remarkably bipartisan and timely manner.

There are a number of studies that show that the preferences of the average voter means nothing. They literally have no bearing on what becomes law. The only thing that matters is the preferences of the top money hoarders. When the elites agree on something, it becomes law immediately. When the elites need help, it happens on the Monday after the crisis, not months later or not at all.

We need to elect politicians who loudly declare "Fuck the rich." If they are not willing to proudly and loudly stand AGAINST the owning class, they will definitely not stand for the working class. Make them say it outright, so the rich hear them saying it, "Fuck the rich. We're coming for the money they took from the working class."

More than just a regular old rich people's bank, this is THE bank for laundering dirty Russian money so the oligarchs can use it outside of Russia. If it goes tits up, the world will rejoice, as a major source of Evil dark money will be gone. Online discourse will become less rancorous as Russian troll farms don't get paid. And the Ukrainians will have an easier time wiping the floor with the sorry excuse for an army the Russians can field. So all in all? This is cause for celebration!

Is the Senate no longer involved?

Shut the fuck up Ivan. Go die in a ditch with the rest of the orks. Be sure to put some sunflower seeds in your pocket first so your life will have served a purpose.

Did you forget to log out of your alt account SuperKendall? I wasn't responding to anyone named "KlomDark."

Porn is like any other addiction industry. The money all comes from the whales. Just like gambling or meth, 10% of customers make up 90% of the revenue stream. 90% of us don't pay for porn, but 10% of us pay for a lot of porn.

Now you are just being dumb. There is no way in hell to shoot down a balloon and guarantee it lands in a lake or river. It was high up and had a huge balloon which, even deflated, would catch the wind.

If this were a republican administration, I bet you'd be saying how genius this all was.

Oh for crying out loud, it was the smart thing to do. What if it had something deadly onboard?

And please, you right wingers only try to second guess our intelligence services when a Democrat is in the White House. If it was a Republican, you'd be crowing about how smart it was.

Did you ever think maybe we knew it was there all along? There are two other very good reasons not to shoot it down: first, we might want the Chinese to know our nuclear weapons systems are fully up to date and operational. Second, we might be feeding them false information.

Except it's become dysfunctional now that the two factions are operating with two different sets of facts, and only one of them based on reality.

Forget about whether or not this is or isn't spying. Even if you take their claims at face value, this balloon would represent airspace incursion by an out-of-control unmanned aircraft. And airspace incursions are something the US military should handle, efficiently and promptly, as a matter of routine. This shouldn't be a giant diplomatic incident or require some great policy analysis to decide to take it down. The message should be plain and simple such as:

NORAD almost certainly knew about this balloon heading towards our airspace probably 5 days ago (late Monday or early Tuesday) when it was still many hundreds of miles away from the west coast, which means that authorization to shoot it down would have been requested at virtually the same time. There should have been plenty of time (hours) to take care of this safely and efficiently before it actually entered US territory, but my guess is that the authorization to shoot it down didn't come until much too late... possibly as late as Wednesday, after it had already crossed into inhabited US territory. Hence the reluctance to shoot it down, and hence the uproar.

One of the best parts about the FCC Broadband Map in my opinion was the idea that it was essentially "crowd-sourced" in that users could file challenges to the data and fix mistakes. But I was surprised to discover recently that there are huge limitations on the challenge process.

A month ago, I was interested in purchasing a property and one of my criteria was having fiber service available. The FCC Broadband Map showed fiber being available there, but before placing an offer, I called the broadband provider to confirm. The representative on the phone apologized and said that no service was available at that address, nor did the system show it becoming available soon. I mentioned that the info at the FCC Broadband Map was incorrect for this address and needed to be corrected, but she did not know what to do about that, but she would "make a note about it" and pass it along. I happened to check the map again about 30 days later, but it was still listed incorrectly. I decided to be helpful and file a challenge myself directly via the FCC website.

Unfortunately, before clicking on "submit" you are required to certify that you are either a current resident at the address or are the legal owner/manager of the property. No one else is permitted to file a challenge, based on the current website language. That's a significant hindrance in this case, because the current owner of the property obviously has no incentive to update the map to make the property look worse to prospective buyers, and obviously the provider here can't be bothered to fix it either. If interested 3rd parties are not allowed to file challenges on behalf of others when they have evidence, then the entire challenge process is sadly flawed and strongly designed to favor the status quo.

In fact, based on the OP, it sounds like this challenge which came from a competing ISP was actually against the FCC's own challenge policy, and I'm pleasantly surprised it went anywhere without simply being tossed/ignored.

No, because of the way copyright works, it does have to be that way. No game developer want their copyrighted IP associated with whatever trash game some dipshit edgelord wants to write. Yeah, sure, you can put Mickey Mouse in your loli-rape game. LOL, never going to happen, and you are dumb for thinking it's a good thing.

NO game company is going to let some other IP into their games. And very few games would benefit even from letting in the companies own IP, from other series. As a gamer, I do not want to see your cowboy in my sci fi game.

So, you'd have to give the companies control over what goes into their games. Making the whole concept pointless.

So not only are you wrong, you're an asshole about it to boot, because you haven't thought this through and don't have any actual, good, reasoned arguments in favor. You just want what you want. And critical thinking is obviously not something you want to do.

Most don't use headphones at all with their cellphones.

I'm fairly certain the issues we have with it are because of the TV (which is a Vizio) implementation. I also have a TCL smart TV with Roku built-in and it works like a champ. And I use a Roku device plugged into my primary TV which is a "dumb" TV thankfully. I have an older Fire TV Stick that still works but is showing its age. I actually quite liked it when we first got it, but the Prime Video app for every other platform sucks balls.

We have a "Smart" TV with chromecast built-in. WHEN it works, it works similar to a Roku. But, by god, it almost never works. I've used just about every media player option that's existed (excepting Apple TV) from MythTV to the original XBMC to Kodi and distros like GeexBox and OpenELEC, and Roku, Fire TV, etc. and Chromecast has been BY FAR the worst experience. Now maybe that's because it's the Smart TV implementation instead of a standalone chromecast device. I don't know.