If the backend is also open-sourced, then perhaps you could put a server on your local LAN.
A quote from Jerry Pournelle seems appropriate. He speaks of energy, but this could also apply to the internet.
"I do know some fundamental economic truths – at least they are 'true' in the sense that they come from observation, not theory. I have stated them before. Energy and freedom lead to prosperity. Restricting energy and adding not freedom but commands and regulation lead to downward economic pathways. Thus has it been, and thus will it be.
"Civilization trends toward converting more and more of its output to structure. Infrastructure or superstructure isn’t important: output is seized and converted to structure, and the largest beneficiaries of that are bureaucracies. Bureaucracies are devoted to the preservation and expansion of the bureaucracy and its members, and only secondarily to the purposes for which they were founded. Thus has it been, and thus will it be."
Or he wrote it down on a sticky-note. People are stupid sometimes.
That the FBI thinks the issue is one of pay shows just how completely out of touch they are
Vote Colonel Sanders!
A fried chicken in every pot.
Each shuttle mission cost between half and one billion dollars and only got us to low-earth orbit.
Sadder, isn't it.
On the one hand I take issue with calling broadband a "Right". Freedom of speech is a Right, freedom of religion is a Right, freedom against unreasonable search and seizure is a Right, etc. You have the same Rights whether you live in an apartment in Manhattan or the boonies of Alaska.
On the other hand, yeah, broadband today is right up there with electricity and telephone and the FCC should be pushing to bring it to all Americans.
I just put "Human Rights" one notch above modern conveniences like electricity and telephone.
Which is why Google didn't call it Java.
Unlike Microsoft which licensed Java from Sun, created an incompatible version, called it Java and got sued.
You can't copyright a language, although you can trademark a language name.
Maybe they tried their passkey and locked it instead.
(Note: I'm not suggesting that excuses their stupidity)
People don't want DSL, but wireless is more expensive (and capped) and AT&T isn't expanding their uverse (at least at any measurable rate).
So what else is there? Dial-up?
The police and their unions still dig in and insist that cops never do anything wrong, and to even question them is unacceptable, refusing to even entertain the idea that an officer might ever step out of line and need to be held accountable for their actions.Why not?
Right, but FedEx isn't refusing to ship copiers because they can be used in counterfeiting.
I think the point is that FedEx may refuse to ship a package labeled "counterfeiting equipment", even if it merely contains a color copier.
... and devolved into little more than an ineffective suicide prevention program.
Is that the consensus is always right and nobody should bother questioning it?
Just curious.
I think you are being disingenuous, the keyword is "unhealthy". There are risks you can control and risks that you can't.
For example risks you can control; smoking, drinking, recreational drugs use, obesity (from overeating, not genetic or physiological), etc.
Risks you can't control; genetics, eating, walking, getting out of the bath, living in general, etc.
And even risks in between, risks where the benefits potentially outweigh the risks; driving, biking, running, swimming, flying, traveling, etc.
In a worst case scenario, what sort of consultant or service should we look for? Would a regular debt management service also handle medical debts? Or is that a specialty? Are there lawyers that specialize in medical debt negotiation?
Just curious.
There's a difference between facing outrageous medical bills and insurance rates because of "sheer crap luck on your part" and "people that take unhealthy risks with their bodies".
Just sayin'.
I don't know, but I think I can understand using "Pop-Ups" to protect your trademark from an imitator cashing in on your reputation in a foreign country on the cheap.
Actually establishing a presence, even if it's only a few stores, would be better.
Using trademark law against a store when there's little or no confusion involved is tacky.