‘The Strain’ Of Dealing With Cable Companies


While what constitutes “sex” may differ from one person to the next, the thing is, when most of us see it, we know it.  I bring it up because for the past few months I have been watching television shows that I wouldn’t normally have access to, online.

Sure, part of it is because I am unemployed, and can’t afford cable.  But you know what?  Even if I weren’t I wouldn’t pay for TV.  My viewing habits are pretty locked in at this point, and I like what I like, and what I don’t, I don’t.

For instance, I am not particularly into sports, so for me to pay for a channel that broadcasts them is a waste.  The same thing for the various flavor of reality shows out there.

Unless you’re talking about those that deal with tattoos.  Tattoos are awesome.

And I live in reality everyday.  I don’t need a television show to remind me how dull it can be when you don’t have someone editing out the slow spots

(Unless they revolve around people with tattoos because, as I have already stated, they’re awesome).

And do you know who’s to blame?  How about the cable companies themselves.  If they weren’t hoarding their programming as if it were gold (and in a sense it is.  Shows can cost millions to develop) then I wouldn’t have to find other means to watch them.

And I understand that the problems start with you start multiplying the amount of people that are doing so.  The thing is, some networks get it.  They understand that there will always be people who will watch their content using methods other than those that they would prefer.  Because, in this instance, HBO understands that they are creating a product so popular that people will go through all sorts of means–other than actually paying for it–to watch their programming.

Advertisements

tattoos aren’t the problem, though the conditions you get them in could be


Updated 7/21 2338

I was speaking to a co-worker a week or so ago, about nothing in particular.  And like such conversations, it drifted seemingly without a goal, from one subject to another, till we alighted on tattoos.  She is adamantly opposed to them–which I knew before the topic came up. So I asked her, half teasing, if her son had gotten one yet since she’s seen mine and knows that I am extremely pro-tattoo.

She said that he hadn’t, and then went into the  various diseases one could get from getting one, such as hepatitis, or AIDS (despite the odds that you can get AIDS from a tattoo are minuscule).

To say that this bothered me was putting it lightly.  What irked me was not that you could get certain diseases from tattoos–if the conditions are right, or perhaps wrong, then that’s a possibility.

The truth of it is that I have at had about three or four of them, and have caught none (knock on wood).  Besides, considering that people have been getting them all over the world for at least 5000 years, they clearly can’t be that bad; though admittedly conditions were different back then.

The thing of it is that she’s personally afraid of them; I get that.  The problem is that she’s spreading her fear like some sort of infection.

And that bothers me because, if her sone doesn’t want to get one, more power to him.  The thing of it is that his decision should not be based upon an exaggerated estimation of the risk or what can go wrong because he might as well not get out of bed if he’s going to worry about all the extremely bad (and oftentimes unlikely) things that could happen.