Here in Uruguay, they got the OLPC. There is no market, and it works great.
All kids in public school have their own, you see them using them on the streets, public squares. It has its application in classes, and most importantly, it was instrumental in connecting all schools with quality internet service, allowing for remote classes, that kind of thing. It was a success in many regards.

Private schools, on the other hand, are subject to market forces and stuff, but are usually pretty poor in their decision making. For example, my kids goes to a private kinder, and their usage of computers is pretty dumb, they still have a computer lab kind of thing, mainly because they weren't wise enough to get a complete solution. Public spending was a lot better around here.

I was just answering _your_ alternative proposal.
I did look at the story, and I think it's a cool idea, that might even end up having some kind of application. This is research, not engineering.

Power over ethernet implies cables.
Expected capture rate is not always 30/60fps.

Just think about it.
This is not an economic problem. It's a problem with regulation, strategy, or whatever.
Wherever you live, you have roads to get there. Roads are thousands of times more expensive than fiber, and they need constant maintenance, investment, and rebuilding. You also have electricity virtually everywhere, or you wouldn't care so much about internet access. Internet access is chump change compared to the rest of infrastructure that you keep building and maintaining.

The problem must be somewhere else, not in the level of difficulty, or the cost. Maybe the strategy, the regulation isn't working, but it's not because it's hard.

ipads are most useful if you want to consume content. Not much to experiment with them, at least not with the Ipad itself.

3D printers are tools, awesome tools. They have nothing in common with Ipads, you can do stuff with 3D printers. Think of them as the logo turtles of today. They show kids a tangible application of programming, physics, math.

Teachers have the opportunity to choose to use that for teaching, or just let them tinker with cool stuff.
  And I mean single teachers, they can just print a mechanical assembly, or an atom model, or a dna model, a geometric shape . With already existing, easy access easy to use, and most importantly, easy to share tools.

Compare that to the authoring you can do with an ipad (or a classroom full of ipads) by itself. You _might_ be able to sketch something, but the tools are just not there, or available.

Lost of people seem to be happy with adblock.
Think of it as as server side adblock, at the very least.

Also, with responsive design and everything, this would be a problem, but not a big one.

Are you sure?
It's hard for me to imagine an awesome CS person who struggles at math. CS is mostly math, or pretty close. Computability, regular expressions, automata, formal proofs, all of those are needed, in my book, to be awesome at CS, and I think you should be at least decent at math to grasp those.

There is a way to expand the model to the internet.

Say you pay a youtube subscription, and you get ad-free youtube, and for the same price, or for an additional, you get ad-free adsense.
That means you won't ever see an adsense ad again. The sites will still have the adsense code, and google will just micro-pay, based on your usage of their site, from your subscription money.

Doesn't look like a bulletproof strategy to me, but something like that might end up happening.

Additionally, those who don't use adsense would be at a disadvantage, because youtube subscribers won't be able to make ads go away.

Of course, the privacy implications of all this are huge, because you would be essentially logged in everywhere, and that's another service that google would be able to provide.

So it's not stealing. It's something else.

And you might want to get your analogy checked, I don't thing it holds. Maybe if it was potato soup + recipe or something like that. In any case, no need for analogies. It's easier to get it without them.

They are not stealing anything from anyone. The users didn't have any source to begin with, for example. They are not entitled to the source. The problem lies in the other end. Ubiquiti is licensing some code, and not complying with the license, by not providing source. This means they are not covered by the license.

This is plain, simple, copyright infringement. Not stealing, something else. And when you do it for profit, most people agree it's a bad thing. At least in the current context.

There's also another bit that I fail to understand.

If the Chinese Firewall guys wanted to DoS github, they could just do it. Playing synthetic traffic against github, for example.
Instead, we say that they hijacked their users computers, so they could generate traffic that in the end would have to go through the firewall.

From the firewall point of view, that wouldn't be a DDoS, because the attacker is always them, no distribution happens. It doesn't make sense, and it's a lot more work than just doing the DoS attack themselves.

Of course, MITM is something they can do, they might be doing that kind of thing, and hijacking clients computers for other reasons, but for this attack, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

In any case, you would need Amazon to actually enforce it.
While they do have more money for legal fees, they would risk a big PR issue if they tried to prevent some guy from working at Walmart after quitting Amazon. Also, the first guy with such a problem wouldn't have a lot of trouble finding someone to help them with legal fees, if only for the publicity.

This is probably just a scare tactic, to discourage people from leaving them, it is unethical, but not really enforceable.

Does that manual encourage bad code ?