No temporary tax or fee EVER goes away.
I don't want an EV.
I'm not going to BUY an EV.
A vehicle that doesn't run on fuel has limited range and utility. I don't want a car that is on a leash.
And if Obama or anyone in DC thinks they can force me into an EV, they can SUCK IT.
Indian Outsources call us all the time. They get quite angry when they find out they are talking to the people they want to replace.
Lately they fake their phone numbers on the caller ID to force me to answer their SPAM calls by pretending to be a 304-xxx-xxxx number (West Virginia).
In India the Caste System still rules (despite being illegal) and they don't think much of West Virginia.
They get quite insulted and curse in Hinglish when you ask them what part of West Virginia they are calling from.
But what do I know?
As to my absence I've been a bit overwhelmed by work stuff, sorry about that, it's no excuse
Because this plan will allow Gawker to continue, perhaps even under the same management. Thiel won't want that.
I am not a lawyer, clearly, but it seems to me that Gawker isn't entitled to bankruptcy protection in this case just to dodge the court judgement since the court judgement is the ONLY REASON THAT THEY ARE INSOLVENT as a company.
Thiel and Hogan's legal team will have a filing before the bankruptcy court on Monday to throw out Gawker's petition and to stop the sale.
The appropriate filing would be for Chapter 7 Liquidation and a court appointed Receiver put in charge of Gawker (thus firing the management) for the purpose of preserving assets needed to pay the judgement.
People are sick of these perpetual price increases. Cable is the only product I can think of that is constantly decreasing in value yet always increasing in price, well above the rate of inflation.
Enough is enough.
I cut the cord back in July, and I've not missed it. And better yet, my dollars are no longer fund channels like MSLSD or CNN.
Most people wouldn't use ad blocking if the advertisers didn't allow malware laden ads be served to their PC's turning them into mindless drones for a botnet. They could fix that problem easily by turning around and vetting ads. Or if the ads weren't so obtrusive and annoying either. Bet we'll see within 3 months that they're reversing this stance, or within a year it shuts down.
Remember when the New York Times decided to put themselves behind a Paywall? That didn't last a year. I suspect the same thing will happen here. People don't like ads. The answer isn't to block adblockers, the answer is to stop annoying the shit out of your visitors that they would WANT an ad blocker!
Why can't they be sued by the victim? I guarantee over a billion a year is spent on malware removal!
Nope. If you want to block my adblocker, fine, I won't go there.
I find NO ad acceptable, but if web ads acted like newspaper ads and sat there, didn't try to distract me from reading, didn't take over my screen, didn't make noise, flash, throb, etc, I'd TOLERATE it.
These days, ad networks are so laden with malware and viruses (when is Google or another ad network going to get sued for not vetting content?) that an ad blocker is antivirus for your web browser!
What is worth doing is worth the trouble of asking somebody to do.