I get what they're trying to accumplish, but wouldn't it be better to prevent them from being bought by corporations?

For sure, taking responsibility for one's actions should be paramout; however, in the world of plastics, it's not quite that simple.
1. the plastics industry is selling their product on the basis that it is recyclable, the problem is that may of those plastics are not being recycled.
    a) it's not cost effective
    b) the region does not have the means to recycle that kind of plastic
    c) that plastic is not easily identified by the processor
2. not all plastics are recyclable (mixed plastics)
    a) they're included with many products
    b) the consumer doesn't know what plastics they're getting until they've arrived
3. not all recyclable plastics get recycled
    a) consumer directly throws them in the trash
    b) processor discards the plastics (see point 1)

Back in the old days, before plastic was used in all kinds of packaging, we used cardboard and glass. Cardboard really can be recycled, glass can too, but glass has another neat trick: it can be disinfected and reused. Cans are great too, they can be recycled. In Europe, they use steel cans which can be sorted magnetically. In the US, they're aluminum which has to be separated manually.

Rhetoric from the left? What? Wear a mask, social distance and donâ(TM)t listen to those dicks trying to kill you with misinformation? Thereâ(TM)s only one party in control at the federal level, theyâ(TM)re setting the tone, and theyâ(TM)re bearers of the majority of the blame.

The assumption is that all information in the internet is correct. The fact is there is a lot of misinformation, conspiracy theories and other noise. Groups of people buy into these misrepresentations because they feel powerless or they jive with their own skewed viewpoints. There's nothing to indicate that these mistruths are just that. There's no feedback device. Back with traditional news outlets, they had reputations. Some you knew were truthful, they won Pulitzer Prizes, and others were fictional (Michael Jack's space baby). The availability of 3G allows someone to access the whole internet for a $200 spend on a phone, whereas before, they needed a computer and a modem. Many countries don't even have the infrastructure for a computer and modem but they have extensive 3G networks. This brings us back to how can we associate global reputations with these sprawling web sites, and how can society disparage the nutters? Just because you're unpopular doesn't mean you're not right, but often times you aren't.

Totally! I like the Microsoft Stores and have purchased a Lumia phone, two laptops, and exchanged a Surface after it broke. For me, it was really convenient, plus their machines are configured without crapware. I'm really bummed to see them go. First Radio Shack, and now this. :-(

Precious Bodily Fluids.

Letting corporations gouge people based on their prior spending is not the same as taxing the rich.
1. You don't know that the sucker paying $3K is actually rich. They're just getting scammed.
2. The Dems want to change the tax laws to ensure the rich are paying their share
3. The additional tax revenue would be used for the betterment of society (medical care for all, more affordable education, sheltering those in need)
4. The additional insurance fees are used to increase the wealth of the rich (stock holders and c-suite)

I don't care who pays for it. Removing carbon from the environment is the goal we all should be striving for.

I love the Microsoft attempted to force customers to Windows 10. Really?! Just like Apple attempts to force customers from 10.3 to 10.13. It's not like it's a whole new OS. It's just another incremental update to Windows NT. They're under no more responsibility to keep making updates to XP than Apple is to 10.3.

I think Microsoft lost its browser lead for a few reasons:
a. Internet Explorer didn't keep up with new features added to Chrome and Firefox
b. IE got a reputation of being buggy
c. Google poured gasoline on that reputation by stating IE and Edge were insecure on its home page
d. Edge's icon looks very simular to IE leading people into believe it's IE
e. The general population is unfamiliar with Edge. Heck, there's lots of developers in my office who still use IE and are surprised there's something better.
f. Edge started missing a bunch of features but has caught up very well

Model III here with 16k upgraded to 48k. Cassette. Great computer. Learned BASIC on it and that I wanted to develop software. Got a model 4p and a 100 in the house to remind me of those times.

So wait, we cry foul when our Android phones don't get upgraded to the next version of Android, but damn Microsoft for upgrading everyone to Windows 10?

Yeah, I understand your Windows 7 works great on your ten-year-old PC, but it's going to run out of updates soon, and if your PC's that old maybe you should consider something a little more modern, or get a version of Linux that will keep it going. For the majority of "just make my PC work" folk, automatic upgrades are great. Keep the machine up to date and not force the users to think.

I theorize that a lot of people who bought consoles for simple games have moved onto their phones or even handheld consoles. That leaves the folks who are willing to spend $60 per game. So given that supposition, what are Microsoft and Sony's total revenu on games sales for the new platforms? Or what is the revenue per console? Has that actually shifted much? If a lot of previous generation consoles were used for cheap games, or hardly at all, then there would be little disparity in the sales income. This is based on the assumption that console sales still fix the (expensive) razor blade model.

The US government applied tariffs to Chinese solar panels because the Chinese were dumping them in the US market. If they can agree to see their product in our market for a fair price, sure we can climate the tariffs; otherwise, forget it cause we're not killing our on shore manufacturing and watching the prices skyrocket.

http://rt.com/business/163552-...

I accidentally posted anonymously.
This is just silly. The problem isn't that they didn't use Linux or MacOS, it's that nobody locked down these computers. They're the school's computers, so they can put whatever they want on them. No one should have rights to install software, and Security Essentials should be turned on, and kept up to date. Sloppy system administration. Pure and simple.