I don't think Trump is running for president to actually vie for the presidency. He's likely doing it to generate attention for his company. It's a business decision--to generate popularity and buzz around his brand. Name brands matter, and even if he only gets 2% of the Republican vote, people will remember that his name was considered for the presidency. Certainly there's a remote possibility of him doing well, but I doubt it.

Considering this is the WORLD CUP you'd think they'd make sure that there are no mistakes. Video refs are definitely needed. Players waste more time taking slow free kicks and acting all hurt after they bump into each other.

DigitalExile

Depends. For long videos like TV shows i use a youtube loophole and skip to each add section then browse another tab whilst they play on mute, then when they've all been played i can watch the whole thing uninterrupted. However for short videos it really depends on if i 've got anything else to do.markop2003

This controversy is rather comical to say the least. FIFA uses the words [disrupt the] "flow" and "slow" [the game down], yet they don't consider how how the game is already slowed down by players arguing with refs over calls. Anyone else notice how quickly ESPN is able to pull up a replay after a goal attempt (1-2 seconds)? A 4th official could make the just decision in less time than what it takes for the argument on the field. Or maybe just even use replay on goals; it wouldn't waste any time (think about the time it takes from when a goal is scored to when the ball starts to move again).

And then FIFA topped it all when a replay of an obvious offsides call was ACCIDENTALLY shown on the stadium's video screen. FIFA was furious that it was even shown; after all, they don't want fans to see blown calls till after the game. Or even worse, have refs be influenced by the truthful video evidence if they happen to look at it when they make a game-changing call. They want to make sure a video replay is never shown again........

to make more money. I watched Avatar once, watched it in 3D a second time, and even though it was regarded as the most advanced 3D technology EVER, I can hardly remember what it actually looked like. The only thing that really sticks in my mind is the visual images of the faces, the planet and the story. Sort of like how you don't remember a video game's graphics specifically, you remember the gameplay more. And the glasses can even carry bacteria. So what's the point of watching movies in 3-D?

I can't really complain, if I were any company [Youtube, CNN, BBC, etc.] and got paid money to show ads during videos, I would care less about the people that watch them. Though one time I had to watch a 45 second ad to watch a 30 second video and just got a little annoyed.. lol. So whenever you guys have to watch a 30 second ad to watch videos on your favorite sites, do you watch the ad or just go and browse some other page (check your FB, mail, news) during the ad itself, and do you honestly feel that you're being deterred from watching videos more than you were before b/c of ads?