Because companies paying telecoms for providing their users access to that which is synonymous with the Internet makes total sense...

If its such a burden to the telecoms, how about the telecoms stop allowing access to said content providers and see who still wants to stay with them?
Google, Facebook and the like provide a commodity which is valuable to the users. If the telecoms want to be valuable to their customers as well it is in their best interest to do what they are paid to do, that is: provide access to those commodities. If they are unable to do so, then I suggest they begin to look internally to find the best way to remain solvent.

If they don't like it, that's not Google, Facebook, Twitter or anyone else's problem.

I never said that the expense is what made it superior. A combination of Unix, ARC Objective-C, Sturdy Construction, and Software tailored for the specific Hardware platform take care of that. My MacBook Pro, Linux desktop, and I are quite happy together.

An Idiot once said:
"Stop Liking What I Don't!"

AAAA, this article is too long for my Slashdot induced ADD!

In all honesty however, this is quite interesting.

If buying a superior product is what passes for drinking "kook-aid" these days then all I can say is "OH YEAH!"

The ergonomics may be less than desirable, and it will be more inconvenient than a good NetBook or MacBook Air. However the idea of combining a Raspberry Pi with a Pico Projector is really fascinating. I might even build a little Lego case that would hold the Raspberry Pi and the projector. The only major problem is what to do for a keyboard and mouse. That could be cumbersome. But it'd be fun to try. Maybe use a projected keyboard as well. Again, the ergonomics would be terrible, but it's be interesting to try.

Having built many a model rocket, I'm not entirely sure how a model rocket could blow up in your face. Maybe I was just lucky, but short of trying what the kids in "October Sky" did, I don't think there's a lot to worry about. Granted, we obviously don't want to have the public schools exposing kids to projects that could lead to lawsuits, but there are plenty of things (model rockets included) which are more than safe enough for children to be trying out and experimenting with in schools which would lead them to become more interested in learning and turn on a life-long love of learning. Despite what the title may say however, the issue at hand is not whether children should be shooting off rockets but in fact is about whether learning should be more hands on than it currently is.
Tests don't teach. Practice does.
Testing doesn't inspire. Making things does.

Google is not hiding, nor aiding China's censorship. In a way... Google is actually "highlighting" China's censorship. Google is a company that wants to keep its customers. It's customers think that Google is to blame for what they can't find (at least from what I understand about the article) and so Google is trying to make it clear that certain things they look for will not work, since their Government doesn't trust them. To those who grasp this concept, every time a word they type in the query box gets highlighted its like Google saying "sorry, your Government doesn't want you to know about that". Whether Google has any other motive than just making it clear that they are not to blame for failed searches or not, the result in the minds of the observant is still worth noting.