I went to the supermarket today. According to the National Enquirer, Hillary Clinton has already been indicted for a whole bunch of illegal things she did. It was on the front page.
I'm still a little leery of jumping on the "OMG FAKE NEWS!!" bandwagon given there seems to be absolutely nothing new about the phenomenon. I'm inclined to blame a combination of an awful Democratic candidate (well, she was. And no, I don't think Bernie would have won either. Democrats had a dreadful choice at the primaries this year) and the seductive nature of Fascism, which has proven itself over and over again to be a message people respond to as long as they don't recognize it for what it is.
The supermarket tabloids have been peddling this crap for decades. TV news, especially local news, also has its own version of "reality", frequently mixing syndicated spots of dubious accuracy with genuine news. (And this is ignoring justified, if over stated, criticism of mainstream serious print media, which is a different category of misleading content.)
Just let me choose the channels I want. Maybe I don't need six channels of ESPN.
Local ABC affiliate: $20/mo
ESPN, Disney Channel, Freeform, A&E, and several others: Included at no additional charge with ABC subscription through your participating multichannel pay TV provider
Would you accept such a model?
The Intercept is a legitimate site co-founded by Glenn Greenwald. It has essentially the same reputation as Greenwald, it's truthful and focuses on certain issues to the point of obsession, but for fairly good reasons.
As far as not answering the question, the correct response to "Will you ever sell your services to make a registry for Muslims?" is the same one as "Would you build baby mulching machines in Toddler sizes?" or even just "If Trump asked you to make your workers wear militaristic uniforms with jackboots, would you do that?" - the answer is always going to be "Fuck no", not "At this time we'd prefer not to answer" or no answer at all. That's regardless of whether the questioner is from the New York Times or Breitbart.
You have to switch it on first...
You're being ripped off. Our satellite is about $60 per month, that includes a DVR and all the other things you'd expect but I have a gut feeling cable companies still charge extra for like HD.
It's actually an article of faith among some here that having your content available to download for free doesn't in any way affect your sales negatively, an argument frequently used as a justification for mass copyright infringement.
The presumption people who make the argument usually have is that people download what they want to test it, and then buy the stuff they think is good. I'm not convinced, but there you have it.
There's no commercial free option for Sling, there's no commercial free version for PS Vue
Would you prefer $200 per month? Because that's what Sling and the like would cost if every channel were as expensive as HBO.
why pay for a service and still be saddled with commercials?
What would the film The Wizard be without commercials for NES games?
The closest thing to "something inherent about the Apple design" is Apple's tighter control over production of devices with Lightning and MagSafe connectors through refusal to license relevant patents. Android devices, on the other hand, use standardized USB micro-B and USB C connectors. Licenses for patents that cover standard USB connectors are offered under "FRAND" (uniform royalty) conditions. So any safe USB charger is a safe Android charger.
VPS providers usually have reasonable reasons to customize the distros they run somewhat to fit within the framework they're using to virtualize each server - which are vary rarely simple "VMWare on a Xeon" type environments due to cost/scalability issues.
My guess is that certain providers are crappier than others.
Hmm, possibly the Mediterranean, though the English Channel and North Sea can also be sources of clouds in Europe.
If you want to selectively block media types, you can do that using a browser extension installed on each PC. Or you can set up a proxy on localhost on each PC and have the browser installed on that PC trust that proxy's root certificate. Then you're back down to two parties being able to see the communication: the client and the localhost proxy, and the server. This regains blocking by media type but loses a shared cache.
It's also possible to configure your Squid proxy to behave differently on sites that are unusually privacy-sensitive using a stare rule. Log the SNI field of each ClientHello message from your proxy's clients. Build a list of which hostnames ought to be cached (high-traffic sites) or not (financial or medical sites), and be transparent with your users about the process of building this list. Bump (MITM) the high-traffic sites so that you can cache them, and splice (tunnel) the sensitive ones so that you can reassure users that your proxy isn't snooping this particular connection. The user will be able to tell whether a connection is through your proxy by looking at who issued the certificate. For example, in Firefox, one can click the lock in the URL bar, click the right arrow, and read "Verified by:".
On the other hand, see replies to bigjosh on Coding Horror Discourse, who expressed the same need for caching. One of the replies expresses a possibility that the fact of having read articles about a particular subject on Wikipedia might itself be sensitive even if Wikipedia is public and cacheable.
Such as mostly newer laptops. Bay Trail stuff in particular, such as the ASUS T100TA and X205TA, took a while for basic functionality to be supported in Debian and other distressed. Bluetooth and screen brightness are still broken on the T100TA.
The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.