I was so looking forward to this, having been a big fan of the original BBC series, with its masterful central performance by Ian Richardson. In fact when I logged in to Netflix (like a lot of people, this show is my sign-up moment), I realised that my expectation level was really high. Within the first 30 seconds, Kevin Spacey's character Frank Underwood has killed something- in this case dispatching an unfortunate dog which has been hit by a hit and run driver. And as the political intrigue starts to develop around him, Spacey just fills the screen. By the end of the first episode, it isn't so much that you have forgotten Ian Richardson as Urqhuart, Underwood's British cousin, but realised that Spacey is taking us somewhere different.
With Francis Urqhuart you got the impression he was always a psychopath, waiting for the trigger to start his Macchiavellian and murderous rise. Underwood seems to be just a more clever, more ruthless and less hypocritical politician than those around him. The fundamentals of the show - the scorned and bitter political back room fixer, the Lady Macbeth figure of Francis' wife, the ambitious young woman journalist, but all updated. Mrs Underwood is no Tory wife, waiting 'in the country' while her husband charts his rise to power. She is the one giving him the backbone to do it. And as we see her brutally wielding the axe at the charity in which she works, it becomes clear she is no slouch in the ruthlessness stakes herself. The character of Zoe Barnes, the young reporter, is in a lot of ways more rounded than Matty Storin in the British version.
Here she is ballsy, ambitious and a bit ruthless herself. While she retains the innocence of the character, she gives the impression she thinks she knows what she is doing. Which will make later episodes much more juicy as she realises she is way over her head. The show is shot beautifully, as you'd expect from the calibre of the team behind it, and the production values are excellent.
Supporting roles are great. It looks like a movie or The West Wing before they ran out of money. But the undisputed joy of this series is Spacey, who is a more world-weary, more cynical Francis, and who is setting about his task of revenge and ambition much like he destroyed the unlucky dog at the start of episode 1: its an unpleasant task but someone has to do it.
Spacey is every bit as good as Ian Richardson in this show and Netflix's big gamble deserves to pay off.
Season 4 of the political drama focuses on the 2016 re-election campaign. Frank (Kevin Spacey) continues on his travels without his wife, feeding rumors of trouble brewing; Claire (Robin Wright) concentrates on her run for a local Congressional seat.
When it becomes clear that neither of them can hope to win without the other on their side, Frank tries to sabotage his wife's campaign, which leads to her having to find other ways to convince the electorate to vote for her and to manipulate her husband. An improvement but not a complete return to form, season 4 of House of Cards offers intrigue, increasing drama, and a growing sense of chaos that the Underwoods’ seem to make their mark in. I was pleased to see more ruthlessness, more blind ambition, and more political jockeying that is born out of a sense of power-grabbing than it is anything political. Season 3 all but lost this, making Underwood seem more gruff than the manipulative bully that his character really is.
With this season there’s an increase focus on Claire, which is initially frustrating yet later manages to get the series back on track in that they start to work together. Their whole feud always felt clunky and poorly conceived. My main gripes with the show revolve around a lack of a real formidable adversary to Underwood. Conway just didn’t do it for me, not a match talent wise nor charisma wise for Spacey. Shows like House of Cards, that have a subdued by notable liberal bent,often have a hard time imagining a strong conservative antagonist—and House of Cards would do well to start. I also found some of the political storylines rather outlandish.
Dec 3, 2017 - Crack De Roxio Easy Media Creator 9 Key. Mar 12, 2009 MPEG2 Activation for Roxio Creator 9 Asked. CD key supplied with new software doesnt work. Easy Media Creator 9; Activation Theme. Aug 06, 2014 Wrong Cd Key - Emc 9 0. I de-installed the entire Easy Media Creator 9 suite and. If you registered. Crack de roxio easy media creator 9 activation. 7 results - You abbyy finereader 9.0 corporate edition keygen need to press the. Oct 19, 2007 Alguien tiene el Serial del Roxio Easy Media Creator 10? Q programa es mejor??? Nero 8- easy media creator 10 de roxio- o ashampoo burning 7?? Roxio easy media creator 9 activation code.Look at most relevant Activation key.
The fixation on the hostage situation, as an example, is something that no president could realistically be a party to—it would only spurn more such occurrences. Underwood had so many master plans and brilliant maneuvers to land him where he is—now he needs to do something with it. The series feels like it’s stalled in parts because there’s nothing else Underwood is reaching for, and that’s a problem. Still very entertaining, fantastic composition and cinematography, and excellent performances. A step back in the right direction.
After a slower third season which focuses mostly on the beginning of Frank Underwood's presidency, season four begins and brings back all of the illustrious wonders absent in the third season. Frank gets a new rival in the form of charismatic, and social media-savvy New York governor Tim Conway who is everything Frank is not; young, a father, and fiercely passionate about both his Presidential campaign and his wife Hannah (Their bathroom counter knows all about the latter).
Frank is both in a fight for the Democratic nomination, and in a fight to salvage his tattered marriage to Claire who truly comes into her own form in this season. And in a real-world twist, a kidnapping on American soil by fanatical extremists brings everything to halt as we wait for the resolution of the season to come. Easily the best season of the show yet alongside Season 2. Anyone who has even casually glanced as Kevin Spacey's acting and liked what they've seen will love House of Cards despite hitting a few slow-points. But like Tom Yates says, don't go into it expecting anything.
January 26, 2015 – 8:57 am 4,832 views Admin MowerPartsZone.com Knoxville, TN Lawn Mower Parts Riding Lawn Mower Parts Service user MowerPartsZone.com just announced the opening of their retail store at 7130 Oak Ridge Highway in Knoxville, TN. They are located in the former location of ProGreen Plus. MowerPartsZone.com has a full line of parts including carburetors, tires, batteries, belts, blades, starters, trimmer string, PTO clutches, and much more. We have parts for ALL BRANDS of power equipment including Craftsman, John Deere, Cub Cadet, Honda, Troy Bilt, Murray, Snapper plus commercial brands like Scag and Exmark. We have engine parts for Briggs and Stratton, Tecumseh, Kohler, Honda, Kawasaki.
MowerPartsZone.com also carries a complete line of go-kart parts including roller chain, clutches, brake bands, engine parts, tires and more! MowerPartsZone.com just added a wide selection of parts for golf carts too covering brands including EZ-Go, Yamaha, Club Car and others. Call us for more information at 865.235.1799.
February 25, 2014 – 11:18 am 9,066 views Admin MowerPartsZone.com Knoxville, TN Lawn Mower Parts Riding Lawn Mower Parts Service user Sulky Velky only $289 w/ FREE Shipping! BRAND NEW Mower sulky / velky for Toro commercial mowers. Buy now and take advantage of our summer savings specials! Locks in a “raised” storage position without extra attachments Protected grease fittings Heavy-duty steel construction Powder-coated finish Quick release pins Easily attaches in minutes to most mid-sized commercial mowers.
Features: Patented vertical pivot support with steel roller bearings Bolts directly to most commercial mowers Durable powdered coated finish Pneumatic tires Extra wide foot platform Two year limited warranty Fits Exmark, Lesco, John Deere, Scag, Toro and most other commercial walk-behind mowers. FREE SHIPPING NATIONWIDE! No matter how you say itvelky, sulky, velkie, or sulkie, ProGreen Plus has the best selection of sulky and velkeys around! Toro Sulky Velky only $289.
The future of illegal torrent websites doesn't look good. As torrent websites continue to disappear, the founder of The Pirate Bay. From an article: While it might look like torrenters are are still fighting this battle, Sunde claims that the reality is more definitive: 'We have already lost.'
. Take the net neutrality law in Europe. It's terrible, but people are happy and go like 'it could be worse.'
That is absolutely not the right attitude. Facebook brings the internet to Africa and poor countries, but they're only giving limited access to their own services and make money off of poor people. Well, I have given up the idea that we can win this fight for the internet.
The situation is not going to be any different, because apparently that is something people are not interested in fixing. Or we can't get people to care enough. Maybe it's a mixture, but this is kind of the situation we are in, so its useless to do anything about it. We have become somehow the Black Knight from Monty Python's Holy Grail. We have maybe half of our head left and we are still fighting, we still think we have a chance of winning this battle.
The problem is that cable providers have only gone from 'I am the only service in town so I will charge through the nose for it' to 'Torrents are illegal so I'm not responding to it'. No company seems to be willing to be realistic about how changing times should be changing their business model and customers are very much being caught in between. Netflix was able to make some progress but really they are not the service they should be because the current broadcasters have been granted so many ways to create barriers. I think it's more than that.
If you take a step back and look away from just piracy, content-sharing illegal or not, what he's talking about is the acceptance of Corporate provided, and dominated, structured privacy-controlled platforms. Or the reverse, personal documenting platforms. Pick your narrative.
Yes, you could say this started with Facebook, others, but it doesn't restrict it to just social media. Consider browser tracking, purchase tracking, etc. And extending into the commoditization of every aspect of online life, that has come to fruition. I think people conveniently forgot, that they have, or had the ability to shape what systems of communication were the winners and losers. And what we see is that convenience won, over personal privacy and their online future 'portfolio', from that.
I have to wonder. Every time I sign up on a new website, be it for work, product purchases, whatever. Just how many databases, across how many sectors of society, are being updated.
And I'm not even talking about whether this extends to Government surveillance. That's a whole OTHER discussion. The Corporate 'profiling' of everyone's online life is VERY disturbing once you go down that rabbit hole. The potential of where it might lead, is what the real concern is. There's a reason students of history are cautious and concerned with this.
The question is, how do we get the majority of everyone else, to realize that. And more importantly, act on it.
On torrenting I disagree, I think you're just not recognizing the compromise that worked out. Back in the day, the RIAA's demand was 'Buy this album for $20' Our response was 'No, that's too much for like one song.' RIAA counter offer was 'Go fuck yourself.' The napster/limewire/kazaa/torrent response was 'No, we gets it for free.'
The RIAA counter offer was 'Go fuck yourself. And also you should feel bad about stealing.' Our response was 'Go fuck yourself, we gets it free.
Clearly those two extremes w. While piracy has given the appearance of the balance of power being with the latter group, it really never has been. Until our culture and laws change, it never will be.
The problem can be summarized as the government is failing to represent the people in this case. When piracy is so commonplace that most people do not really view it as a crime, then there is a disconnect happening. Laws for civilizations are supposed to reflect common values shared by people of the society, but in this case they are only reflecting the wishes of a few 'people' (corporations).
Now now.how dare you bring sensible logic into this emotional, self-centered, naive argument! Everyone knows that the work product of thousands of people is the inalienable free property of The People because reasons. And if you don't agree then you must be a greedy scumbag billionaire movie producer who eats live puppies for breakfast off solid gold plates in their million-square-foot megamansion heated by burning $100 bills and staffed by slaves who are starved and beaten daily. Now I'll freely admit I.
This whole 'it isn't theft' argument is ultimately self-defeating because you'll kill off the flow of content. Nobody indie studio or director with a bunch of no-name actors and no real budget is going to reliably produce something equivalent to what a skilled director and actor with a $150 million budget could do.
And nothing of value would be lost. More generally, the existence of everything from folk music, to anonymous graffiti, to Free Software, to anything released under a creativecommons.org p. Its not the cost, its the control.
Blu rays come with unskippable ads, they cant be easily backed up, and the physical disc is larger than the computer i store thousands of movies on. I really doubt you got a computer smaller than a BluRay disc. Granted a 200-disc spindle would be bigger than a 10TB HDD or you could use a USB stick if you want to win in two dimensions, but pressed discs are quite compact and durable if treated nicely. WIthout the DRM, I don't really mind the form factor at all. Well it happens to think that Rogue One is worth 23 bucks, and I am going to buy it. However, it's pretty much the ONLY movie I'm considering buying since.
I dunno, quite a few years ago. I stream online radio, the type of music I listen to is largely unavailable or very costly to obtain in physical form (P&P and some providers don't send to my country). As for software and games, I stopped pirating them a decade ago (when my income finally reached levels where I stopped worrying about what am I. 'Star Wars Rogue One' is charging you $22.99 for the Blue Ray copy! What an abuse!
Red Herring fallacy much? I don't have a problem paying for BluRays.
What I do have a problem is that somehow it is magically illegal to decrypt and copy the bits so that my OTHER devices (Laptop, Phone, Tablet) can't play the bitstream due to some 'Imaginary Property' DRM bullshit. Why is it illegal to download the bits when I already own a physical copy??? Secondly, you're assuming I can even BUY the movie in the first place.
Let me know where I can legally buy the BluRay of youtube.com??? NOTE: The trailer is in 1080p but only the DVD is available for purchase. Personally I don't pirate but I can understand the reason why someone might. The issue is not Black and White like you assume.
' We can accept God becoming Man to save Man, but not Man becoming God to save himself.' - Vernon Linwood Howard. While I don't use these sites in general (too much weirdness and people poisoning the pool with malware), we do have Internet issues we need to address. Net Neutrality certainly has it's flaws.
It's a mistake to say it's the end of Internet piracy however. China pretty much dominates that market (2nd by countries in South America possibly).
The IP laws certainly need to be changed from having a virtually unlimited timespan on government protection so people can sit on their laurels. But piracy is certainly. Maybe you should stop executing your movies?
First, a lot of people are 'executing their movies' without even being aware of the possibility of executing a movie. By default, Windows Media Player and possibly other video players supporting WMV digital restrictions management will microsoft.com when playing videos restricted by DRM. Second, videos can be deliberately mis-encoded, with the purported solution being to download a 'codec pack' that turns out to be a trojan. Third, videos can be deliberately mis-encoded to exploit vulnerabilities in parsing of video streams, audio streams, subtitle streams, or the container that multiplexes them.
Not all users are up-to-date on patches, particularly when the patch is buried in a service pack in the hundreds of megabytes to gigabytes. The first line of your betanews article.
Net neutrality only really matters to techies No it really matters to everyone. Maybe only techies care, but everyone is affected. All the things on the internet that people take for granted, google, facebook, snapchat, instagram, netflix, youtube and a whole host of others only could get going and scale up because of an open internet. Once the big providers start to charge from both directions, only the big boys will be able to afford to play. That means everyone is going to be stuck in a low competition environment where the incumbents have a huge advantage.
That means the next youtube or whatever won't happen. Those matter. Facebook, Snapchat and even Netflix less so.
And we're not talking about Facebook or even Netflix going away, we're talking about them cost a bit more to use. And the next Youtube will bleed a little more money up front. Compared with coal jobs going away without any real replacement or the various American healthcare crises that's not even small potatoes. If you want NN stop abandoning the lower classes. If you want them to. Those matter.
Facebook, Snapchat and even Netflix less so. Entertainment has been a part of human culture far longer than Transportation. And Healthcare as you are thinking of it. It is literally older than recorded history. You are basically claiming that one of the innate and possibly most distinctive human qualities is unimportant. Compared with coal jobs going away without any real replacement or the various American healthcare crises tha. How much are they paying you?
Whenever there's a product or service, there's those who make it, those who consume it and middlemen. Getting rid of most the middlemen has been the greatest boon of the Internet. Middlemen love to gauge, don't you think the post office would love to gauge how much they charge to deliver this particular package from this sender?
The phone company to connect this particular call? That's what you want the ISP to do, sit in the middle and shake down any website you want to visit. You sound way too smart to be this dumb, so I guess the question is: Comcast, Charter, AT&T or Verizon? Getting rid of most the middlemen has been the greatest boon of the Internet. So why are you arguing for a market structure that looks like 'Google/Facebook regulated Comcast/Verizon consumer'? Seems to me that it is you who wants a permanent middle man to exist, a middleman whose job it is to redistribute costs among Internet users to meet your criteria of net neutrality.
What companies like Comcast/Verizon want is to be able cut out the middleman and deliver content directly. Download scientist high priest of dub rar free. That is, for video, movies, e.
These companies know that 'net neutrality' is in their financial advantage and makes it harder for small companies to compete. More than that, it makes it harder for access providers to leverage their position as access providers to make inroads as content providers. If Net Neutrality truly dies, Verizon and Comcast will be able to prioritize the traffic from their own competing services to harm Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and Google. Without using traffic shaping, QOS or similar means to disadvantage the competition, any new upstart has to actually be better than an existing service.
Google beat Yahoo because Google was better at doing som. To see who gets the advantage from net neutrality, look at who is sponsoring it: Yes they get advantage from it, but they're not the only ones. Google/YouTube, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Netflix. Do you seriously want us to believe that on this one issue, these companies are putting aside their incumbent advantage and lobbying to make it easier and cheaper for small competitors to compete with them. They also know the other big incumbents, i.e.
Verizon, Comcast etc will use their incumbent advantage to try t. And that amounts to a compelling argument for net neutrality. Efficient markets rely on level playing fields. If you're not going to have an efficient market, why bother at all and not just nationalise it? At least that way there's not a profit incentive to screw everyone.
You just made that argument: companies like Verizon, Comcast, etc. Would 'try to milk' the big companies for money. Without net neutrality, streaming will be throttled by default. Both small and large companies will be unable t. This is exactly the same thing that happened with Napster and others. It wasn't JUST the enforcement that caused music piracy to switch from widespread to niche, it was the ability to buy songs on iTunes, and more and more streaming options. Normal people will jump to piracy when they can see they're being screwed.
The music industry wouldn't adapt until people started pirating at a widespread pace, and then they did. Sure, many people still pirate music, but a majority of people stream it, either by an ad-supported service or by paying for a subscription. The same thing has finally happened with video. HBO is a good one to use as an example. Game of Thrones was only available with HBO on a pay-TV subscription.
They added the ability to buy seasons online, but that was too expensive for a single show. Then, they did HBO Now (again, Apple helped make that happen), and many people decided that the price was fair for the benefits it gave them, and far fewer people were torrenting it.
The lesson is that when corporations get too greedy, people work around them. They can still be plenty greedy, though, and as long as people feel they're getting a reasonably fair deal, they'll go legit. Enforcement alone didn't kill TPB, businesses adapting caused fewer people to fight against the enforcement. ' Enforcement alone didn't kill TPB, businesses adapting caused fewer people to fight against the enforcement. ' TPB killed TPB, not streaming services.
Pirating still continues just as it has all the time. Sure, streaming services have gotten cheaper and more convenient, but it's not really causing less piracy. Many people around the world still cannot afford these prices. Many people still prefer storing and having access to videos or audio at all times, instead of being regulated by some third party when an.
Oh, about the Subject: You're free to have unlimited services if you are willing to pay for them. You can get pretty much all the videos/movies/music you want online with no hassles if you're willing to pay about $100-200 in monthly subscription fees. You're free to have unlimited, unfiltered access to the Internet if you're willing to pay about $200-$400 in monthly fees for a 'professional' or 'business' Internet connection, more if you're running big servers. The rest of us, however, are happy with our $10/m. Which of these subscriptions includes access to.
Or did you intend your 'pretty much' hedge to cover such cases? First, if the copyright holder doesn't want to distribute the film, they have the right to make that decision.
In Europe, that's actually considered a fundamental moral right of artists and authors, not just a commercial incentive. Second, for the specific content you mention, you can buy DVDs online.
You seem to be implying that you ought to have a right to circumvent copyright if you can't get. Sunde's socialist perspective is weird to me; I can't agree with him on that stuff. And yet, my vision is a lot closer to his than to yours. When you give $n/month figures for music and movies, from my perspective that looks extremely dishonest, because you're presenting it as though the user only pays money. I pay slightly more money for piracy than you're paying for your 'legit' services.
(Not going to say what it is, but people should be able to guess it, and the only reason I'm paying 3 times more than similar pirates, is that I have so much redundancy and overlap, in order to keep things perfectly reliable.) It's not about the money. You're not in control of the software. You don't have competitive selection in the software, for a given service. If you want to watch HBO, you have to run HBO Now or else you don't get to watch the show.
Same for Netflix, Amazon, etc. Want an integrated menu where Game of Thrones is right next to House of Cards, plays with the same player with the same controls, etc? You're fucked. Internet go down again, but your LAN is up so you wanna play from local storage? You're fucked. And if someone wants to show you an ad (I don't know if Netflix and HBO do that yet, but some services do) then you're going to see that ad. You're running someone else's software.
The software is their friend, not your friend. The software doesn't use standards.
The software might show you ads. The software cannot be security-audited. The software wants information that it shouldn't need. The software doesn't play well with its competitors' software.
The software leaks and has bugs that attackers can exploit to install their own malware, and that you're not allowed to fix. That's absurd. It's almost luddism.
I don't understand how technies, especially, don't see that as extremely infuriating and unacceptable. You are paying fewer dollars than me, but you are paying so much more than me, in convenience, security, reliability, and even aesthetics. (And you call it 'no hassles.' We have very different ideas of what a hassle is.) Piracy fixes all that.
As long as some people keep their standards high instead of slipping into the hell you're living, piracy will remain. Thing is, this isn't even just about media. I'm seeing more and more people turn control of their computers (including the ones in their pockets and on their nightstands and in their cars) over to others. You're paying for so many things, and paying in so many ways that you don't even know, all because you think it's 'normal' to be running someone else's software. You think it's normal for the software that you run, to serve its publisher's interests over yours. It's not normal.
Season 2 Rick And Morty
It's fucking weird. And if we can push back in media, maybe we can push back everywhere. If we can make this all go back to paying-for-things with only money, holy shit, that'd be a victory for everyone. But it's not going to happen as long as you keep using those other currencies, or as long as you stay unconscious of the exchange rate. Run your own software.
(By that, I don't necessarily mean you have to write it; but it has to serve YOU.) Don't compromise. And if media won't play with it, pirate that media. Deny them the money, such that the only way they can get paid, is if they comply to standards so that you can use it with your software. Money or nothing. Live free or die. ' That's absurd. It's almost luddism.
I don't understand how technies, especially, don't see that as extremely infuriating and unacceptable. You are paying fewer dollars than me, but you are paying so much more than me, in convenience, security, reliability, and even aesthetics. This isn't just a characteristic in media, it's a cancer all over the place. From industrial machines to the lone person downloading music on their iphone. A lot of people accept this situation, I contribute it to our declining education, wages and salaries. I'm seeing more and more people just accept the way things are, I don't see people saying 'No way, I don't want it this way'.
You should see the freakout I get when I ask machine manufacturers to give me full access to their software and PLC or get the hell out of my building (All of them break after that). I can't afford having a machine go down and I have no clue why and I won't find out why until the service guy flies in from the east coast or Europe somewhere when I have perfectly qualified people on the spot, including me. We get what we deserve: corporate masters. Perhaps you have corporate masters, but I only have corporate slaves. They do all what I want when I want it. When I feel generous, I throw a coin or two in their direction. When they don't behave exactly as I want, I stop throwing coins.
Sometimes, I even stop throwing coins for no reason, just to show them who the master is. Although they always seem happy and do all what I say, they are greedy and dishonest beings (logically, much below any living being, that's why slavery is acceptable for them) always.
But he shouldn't deliver such wrong statements. Piracy (or whatever you prefer to call it) is far from dead and, IMHO, is actually winning the war. Fee-based business dealing with the most demanded and easily-copyable goods (e.g., videos or music) have went through a tremendous evolution in the right direction (the one which is beneficial for the the highest number of people), mainly thanks to the tremendous impact of piracy and sites like The Pirate Bay.
I have seen a signature around of a Japanese pro. Sunde is not specifically talking about sites that sell illegal goods/services, he's talking about the Internet as a whole. He's saying freedom has taken and nobody seems to care. Everything is tracked by both corporations and Governments.Digesting, monetizing, profiteering and assessing your threat level from your online behavior without your consent or even knowledge, you can no longer have an opinion that differs from the masses without ramifications (job loss, social outing, potentially incarceration), you can't go to certain sites, you can't even have certain information - it's the illegalization of information that's the scariest, the outlawing of ideas. And we're there. Slashdot is the unpleasant-smelling uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner table who was laid off during the dot-com bubble, decided to retire early, and spends the rest of his days complaining about how new-fangled touch-screen smartphones don't support vi keybindings the way God and Ken Thompson intended, how systemd would never have happened under a Libertarian president, and that global warming is a feminist conspiracy. The rest of us come here because it's mildly more entertaining than going to an actual zoo.
Having programmed computers since the 1980s, I can't imagine what it's like to just come into the field now. There are so many layers from brain to bit, I would be quite intimidated if I was just starting out. Learning the new technologies as they came out over the years made it manageable.
Of course, learning is different these days. Back then if I wanted to understand an operating system or a programming language I would get a manual and read it cover to cover.
Now I just look things up when I need to kno. I've only gotten a few responses thus far, one of which really had nothing to do with the question being asked.
![Torrent Torrent](https://youngwifesguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Making-a-Multi-Family-Living-Situation-Work-2-1.jpg)
The other two, however, are precisely what I was expecting and align with what myself and my friends and family do, as well. If there are any RIAA or MPAA execs (or execs of their member companies) here, take note. Piracy can either equal sales or no sales, entirely on the quality of the content. Piracy does not, de-facto, equal lost sales (in fact, it never truly equals lost sales, though it may. As someone who does the same thing, I truly feel bad for the smaller labels who promote via torrent sites, every time such a site gets shut down. Major label stuff can be discovered through almost any music streaming service, but most indie stuff either doesn't exist on a given service or is never played in 'radio' mode, so you'll never hear it if you don't already know about it. Here's the hard truth about the music industry's 'war on piracy'.
It's not about piracy, it's about killing the indie scene so the incumbent labels are the only source for music. It's purely anti-competitive, full-stop.
January 26, 2015 – 8:57 am 4,832 views Admin MowerPartsZone.com Knoxville, TN Lawn Mower Parts Riding Lawn Mower Parts Service user MowerPartsZone.com just announced the opening of their retail store at 7130 Oak Ridge Highway in Knoxville, TN. They are located in the former location of ProGreen Plus. MowerPartsZone.com has a full line of parts including carburetors, tires, batteries, belts, blades, starters, trimmer string, PTO clutches, and much more. We have parts for ALL BRANDS of power equipment including Craftsman, John Deere, Cub Cadet, Honda, Troy Bilt, Murray, Snapper plus commercial brands like Scag and Exmark. We have engine parts for Briggs and Stratton, Tecumseh, Kohler, Honda, Kawasaki.
MowerPartsZone.com also carries a complete line of go-kart parts including roller chain, clutches, brake bands, engine parts, tires and more! MowerPartsZone.com just added a wide selection of parts for golf carts too covering brands including EZ-Go, Yamaha, Club Car and others.
Call us for more information at 865.235.1799. February 25, 2014 – 11:18 am 9,066 views Admin MowerPartsZone.com Knoxville, TN Lawn Mower Parts Riding Lawn Mower Parts Service user Sulky Velky only $289 w/ FREE Shipping! BRAND NEW Mower sulky / velky for Toro commercial mowers. Buy now and take advantage of our summer savings specials! Locks in a “raised” storage position without extra attachments Protected grease fittings Heavy-duty steel construction Powder-coated finish Quick release pins Easily attaches in minutes to most mid-sized commercial mowers. Features: Patented vertical pivot support with steel roller bearings Bolts directly to most commercial mowers Durable powdered coated finish Pneumatic tires Extra wide foot platform Two year limited warranty Fits Exmark, Lesco, John Deere, Scag, Toro and most other commercial walk-behind mowers. FREE SHIPPING NATIONWIDE!
No matter how you say itvelky, sulky, velkie, or sulkie, ProGreen Plus has the best selection of sulky and velkeys around! Toro Sulky Velky only $289.